Priorities of road users to be changed to place responsibility on those that pose the greatest danger to others.

[Failed Unit]

Round here the grumpiness is more out in the countryside.
The roads are narrow and twisty and you can be stuck behind bikes for ages and ages. They are slower than a tractor/caravan etc, particularly up hill.
Since the Olympics etc the Surrey Hills have hundreds of MAMILs about so you can repeatedly get stuck behind them on a single trip. Some bloke in lycra out for a leisure ride is also going to get much less sympathy than a tractor going about it’s business (and the tractors are far far more likely to pull over and let you go by)

Interesting contrast, I am very easy to pass on a hill as I am not going fast (but less like to stop and let someone pass as I don't want to lose momentum), but I do try and let motorists pass as quickly as I can by stopping in gateways if needed so they pass on my terms rather then take a high risk move that is likely to seriously injure me.

 

[83A]

I genuinely don't get why drivers get so wound up about cyclists. When I drive, it's rare to catch up a cyclist and usually possible to overtake safely within seconds. I'm more likely to catch up a vehicle going slightly slower than me which is more difficult to overtake.

It’s because a huge amount of car drivers are loaded with PCP finance on their latest “Status symbol” and therefore think they have more rights than anyone else. God forbid they have to add 30 seconds to their journey time either

 

[nw1]

As someone who is probably 95% pedestrian, 5% cyclist, 0% car driver - I would say that the biggest problem in this country is for cyclists.

Cyclists are in many cases given the 'choice' of cycling along dangerously busy main roads (endangering themselves) or illegally cycling along pavements (potentially endangering pedestrians, but at a guess less of an accident risk than following the busy main road).

We need more in the way of dedicated off road cycling routes, as is done on large parts of the continent (and yes, I know that sadly Continent-bashing and doing things 'our own way' rather than listening to what other countries have to say is rather fashionable right now amongst our political masters). This rather macho 'cycling on busy roads is good for you' attitude does seem to be a peculiarly British thing.

 

[Meerkat]

Last time I was delayed by more than a minute it was a flock of sheep crossing from one field to another. It's the country, it happens. Stop being so stressed.

It’s not the country, it’s outer suburbia. So you have a lot of commuters and business drivers being repeatedly held up by people just out for a ride - that’s why they can get impatient and frustrated.

As someone who is probably 95% pedestrian, 5% cyclist, 0% car driver - I would say that the biggest problem in this country is for cyclists.

Cyclists are in many cases given the 'choice' of cycling along dangerously busy main roads (endangering themselves) or illegally cycling along pavements (potentially endangering pedestrians, but at a guess less of an accident risk than following the busy main road).

We need more in the way of dedicated off road cycling routes, as is done on large parts of the continent (and yes, I know that sadly Continent-bashing and doing things 'our own way' rather than listening to what other countries have to say is rather fashionable right now amongst our political masters). This rather macho 'cycling on busy roads is good for you' attitude does seem to be a peculiarly British thing.

The continent is built differently - there is much more space for separate cycling facilities.
Cyclists are better on the road, with numbers making them safer (so it would help if safety campaigners dialled back all the “you’re going to die!” drama)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Cyclists are better on the road, with numbers making them safer (so it would help if safety campaigners dialled back all the “you’re going to die!” drama)

I don't agree. Cycling on busy/fast roads is not fun. Dedicated facilities alongside them (quality ones like the Dutch have) are far better and the only way you'll get decent utility cycling take-up across the age groups, short of reducing the national speed limit to 20mph.

 

[Spamcan81]

How would it be enforced? How should a cyclists know how fast they are going? How often is excessive bike speed actually a problem, when excessive car speed is a far, far, far bigger killer?

Once is once too many where the victim is concerned. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-engla...s been jailed,injuries sustained in the crash.

 

[Meerkat]

I don't agree. Cycling on busy/fast roads is not fun. Dedicated facilities alongside them (quality ones like the Dutch have) are far better and the only way you'll get decent utility cycling take-up across the age groups, short of reducing the national speed limit to 20mph.

There generally isn’t room for such facilities (and the sprawling junctions they need to be safe). And they will end up on the road at some point anyway.
large scale utility cycling will only be in town/city where fast roads are rare.
I think what we really need is cheap bikes, safe cycle parking, and a drive to make housing have secure bike storage. And an end to the scare tactics.
And cycling on the roads will rapidly become much nicer as cars, buses, and vans go electric

 

[miami]

Once is once too many where the victim is concerned. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-engla...s been jailed,injuries sustained in the crash.

What does that have to do with excessive speed?

 

[Bikeman78]

It’s because a huge amount of car drivers are loaded with PCP finance on their latest “Status symbol” and therefore think they have more rights than anyone else. God forbid they have to add 30 seconds to their journey time either

From 20 years of observations, the vast majority gain absolutely nothing by overtaking me in urban areas, unless joining the queue for the next red light a few seconds earlier is considered a win. I rarely cycle on roads out of town. I do the Taff trail but that's nearly all off road.

 

[nw1]

It’s not the country, it’s outer suburbia. So you have a lot of commuters and business drivers being repeatedly held up by people just out for a ride - that’s why they can get impatient and frustrated.

The continent is built differently - there is much more space for separate cycling facilities.
Cyclists are better on the road, with numbers making them safer (so it would help if safety campaigners dialled back all the “you’re going to die!” drama)

I personally don't feel safe on busy main roads and generally take (legal) steps to avoid them at all costs, mostly involving detours along quiet residential streets which can add to the distance quite significantly.

Main problem I have is that it's often a PITA to leave an urban area and reach the surrounding countryside. There are some dedicated cycle paths (largely along pavements, sometimes through parks etc) but they are somewhat limited.

In true rural areas it's less of a problem as you can stick to quiet country lanes.

 

[Factotum]

View attachment 100721

This is Mercedes' current F1 car. According to sky sports it looks really good.

I suspect that's why people choose black clothes to wear, they think it looks really good.

The Mercedes F1 car use to be silver (The Silver Arrows being their nick name). They changed to black last season at their leading driver's insistence that it would increase ethnic diversity in the sport.

(and the tractors are far far more likely to pull over and let you go by)

Run that past me again. In 50 years of driving I have never seen a tractor pull over for following traffic. Indeed I doubt that tractors have rear view mirrrors.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think what we really need is cheap bikes, safe cycle parking, and a drive to make housing have secure bike storage.

Bikes are not expensive, you can get excellent utility bikes from Decathlon for a couple of hundred quid, or for next to nothing in the paper. £5K super light road bikes are irrelevant to utility cycling.

Cycle parking could indeed be better, but Sheffield stands are provided in many places and coupled with two Sold Secure locks this is secure enough in most places for a cheap utility bike which isn't very attractive to nick anyway.

You can find a place to store a bike in most houses, even if that's putting a Sheffield stand and a cheap shed in the back garden, or just using the garage which is probably used more for bikes than cars in most cases if you have one. Flats typically have provision these days too.

And cycling on the roads will rapidly become much nicer as cars, buses, and vans go electric

No, it won't. It's not the engine that makes cycling on the road scary, it's the large fast vehicle close to you against which your only protection is a polystyrene hat. Segregation is the only way.

Run that past me again. In 50 years of driving I have never seen a tractor pull over for following traffic. Indeed I doubt that tractors have rear view mirrrors.

I have on a number of occasions.

I personally don't feel safe on busy main roads and generally take (legal) steps to avoid them at all costs, mostly involving detours along quiet residential streets which can add to the distance quite significantly.

Main problem I have is that it's often a PITA to leave an urban area and reach the surrounding countryside. There are some dedicated cycle paths (largely along pavements, sometimes through parks etc) but they are somewhat limited.

In true rural areas it's less of a problem as you can stick to quiet country lanes.

This is a huge issue. It's not possible to reach Buckingham from MK without a lengthy detour via Winslow unless happy to cycle on the A421/422. It would take only about 3km or so of dedicated track on one or other of those for it to otherwise be possible via "yellow" roads. This sort of situation needs fixing, and in this case there's plenty of room to add a track.

What is needed is to assess pairs of adjacent towns and ensure there is a low-traffic, reasonably direct and not excessively hilly route by bicycle between them all, and to fix the ones where (like MK-Buckingham) there aren't, both by signposting more numbered, OS-mapped cycle routes and by filling the gaps by providing both cycle paths and footways on sections of unavoidable A or major B-road.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

Tractor? I saw a combine harvester going through town yesterday. Limited to about 20 kmh, it held up many other vehicles, very good! I benefited too, it made a gap for me to cycle across the road.
In many situations a tractor would be unable to pull over, it is so big and heavy. On a busy road it might have to wait ages to resume its journey.

..
I am a railway enthusiast. One reason I love railways is that they are so safe. Would that like standards were applied to road vehicles.

 

[Falcon1200]

I personally don't feel safe on busy main roads and generally take (legal) steps to avoid them at all costs, mostly involving detours along quiet residential streets which can add to the distance quite significantly.

Main problem I have is that it's often a PITA to leave an urban area and reach the surrounding countryside. There are some dedicated cycle paths (largely along pavements, sometimes through parks etc) but they are somewhat limited.

In true rural areas it's less of a problem as you can stick to quiet country lanes.

I also try and stay off main roads as much as possible, ie A and B roads, except perhaps on Sundays with less traffic. The B roads sometime seem more dangerous, being narrower but still with plenty of fast and large vehicles ! Fortunately, where I live there are some lovely back roads to cycle, the drawback being that these often have steeper hills. There are also some excellent paths on old railway lines, including some where the infilled bridges provide easy access.......

 

[Meerkat]

Run that past me again. In 50 years of driving I have never seen a tractor pull over for following traffic. Indeed I doubt that tractors have rear view mirrrors.

Many many times, both locally and out in the proper country.

Bikes are not expensive, you can get excellent utility bikes from Decathlon for a couple of hundred quid, or for next to nothing in the paper. £5K super light road bikes are irrelevant to utility cycling.

Cycle parking could indeed be better, but Sheffield stands are provided in many places and coupled with two Sold Secure locks this is secure enough in most places for a cheap utility bike which isn't very attractive to nick anyway.

You can find a place to store a bike in most houses, even if that's putting a Sheffield stand and a cheap shed in the back garden, or just using the garage which is probably used more for bikes than cars in most cases if you have one. Flats typically have provision these days too.

You just added two expensive locks and a shed to the cost of a bike.
carrying the locks is also a pain. There’s load of bike stands in my town…..and loads of bikes getting nicked. Back gardens are only ok if you can get to them without going through the house.
Need to make sure new homes have bike storage built in (many don’t have garages any more) - the new flats are a start.

It's not the engine that makes cycling on the road scary, it's the large fast vehicle close to you against which your only protection is a polystyrene hat. Segregation is the only way.

Numbers is the way, segregation is rarely practical in this country (other than on road) and risks forcing cyclists onto slower routes.
A lot of people seem to manage just fine on the roads, a lot of the fear is overreaction by those who don’t yet cycle to being told it’s dangerous (all the ranting about wearing helmets etc)

 

[miami]

Need to make sure new homes have bike storage built in (many don’t have garages any more) - the new flats are a start.

In towns, rental bike (and/or escooter) schemes would be of big benefit. Why bother owning and storing a bike when you can just rent one from 50 yards away for the 10 minute ride when you need it.

 

[Ediswan]

And cycling on the roads will rapidly become much nicer as cars, buses, and vans go electric

Less fumes, but they are quieter, so more likely to approach undetected and come as a surprise when they do pass. Busses with engines at the back are already relatively stealthy.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You just added two expensive locks and a shed to the cost of a bike.

How else are you going to solve that for existing housing stock?

carrying the locks is also a pain

Never found that, fit a luggage carrier (as any utility cyclist wants anyway) and strap to that with shock cord. A good utility bike comes with one anyway.

There’s load of bike stands in my town…..and loads of bikes getting nicked. Back gardens are only ok if you can get to them without going through the house.

Very few houses don't have rear or side access of any kind (e.g. for the bins).

Need to make sure new homes have bike storage built in (many don’t have garages any more) - the new flats are a start.

Yes, would help. But new homes are a tiny amount of the housing stock.

Numbers is the way, segregation is rarely practical in this country (other than on road) and risks forcing cyclists onto slower routes.

I fundamentally don't agree. There's just farmland along most main rural routes, and in urban settings you can do it by taking space from cars. London, probably the most space-pressured city in the UK, is making excellent progress here.

A lot of people seem to manage just fine on the roads, a lot of the fear is overreaction by those who don’t yet cycle to being told it’s dangerous (all the ranting about wearing helmets etc)

It will never, ever be pleasant to ride a bicycle on a busy road. The only way to replicate the success of the Netherlands in those other than experienced, confident road cyclists and blokes in their 20s is to replicate their method, that is to give cyclists their own space, at the expense of cars if necessary though it often isn't.

In towns, rental bike (and/or escooter) schemes would be of big benefit. Why bother owning and storing a bike when you can just rent one from 50 yards away for the 10 minute ride when you need it.

Interestingly these haven't been very successful in MK. They are generally more needed in towns/cities with large centres like London, Edinburgh and Glasgow; most UK towns and cities (even as big as Birmingham) have very compact centres which have been constrained by ring roads and the likes so stayed small, as a result of which all intra-centre journeys can be done on foot, and journeys from home you'll just use your own bike. You can always find somewhere to store one if you've got a house (even flat owners often keep them on balconies).

 

[Bikeman78]

No, it won't. It's not the engine that makes cycling on the road scary, it's the large fast vehicle close to you against which your only protection is a polystyrene hat. Segregation is the only way.

I think road deaths will increase over the next few years until people get used to electric cars. They pull away silently and rapidly, sometimes with no warning.

Less fumes, but they are quieter, so more likely to approach undetected and come as a surprise when they do pass. Busses with engines at the back are already relatively stealthy.

Dennis Darts are almost silent until they hit a pothole which makes loose panels rattle. Many times I've glanced over my shoulder to find one right behind me. Hardly any left in Cardiff now though. The Mercedes are easier to hear.

 

[ashkeba]

, but if the road is that wide they can often pass a single bike without impacting the traffic in the opposite direction at all.

Not many roads have lanes that wide any more. Wide roads have had wide shoulders painted over the last 20 or so years. If you pass a bike completely in the same lane today, without even two wheels over a line, you are probably a careless driver.

 

[AM9]

I think road deaths will increase over the next few years until people get used to electric cars. They pull away silently and rapidly, sometimes with no warning.

Maybe the number of pedestrians hit by vehicles in towns might increase for a while, that will in part be balanced by the reduction in deaths and poor health outcomes with the reduction of street-level pollution.

 

[The Ham]

You just added two expensive locks and a shed to the cost of a bike

Let's say you've just brought a £500 bike, and you need a new shed; well my last shed (7 foot by 9 foot,) cost £1,200 (earlier this year) installed and with the old shed taken away.

So far compared to the cost of car ownership you've mostly covered 12 to 18 months if fuel and insurance.

2 decent locks at £50 each and that's VED and maybe an MOT for a year (depending on the duty owed on your car).

As for backpack/panniers with a rack and lights that's only a service for a car.

We've not even looked at other costs (like buying the car, parking, new tyres and other parks) and we could still do all that every year!

In reality my last shed lasted 12 years before it needed replacing (mostly due to having no children when first installed and there's now a few kids bike and a tag-along), whilst at the opposite end my lights are fairly new they're still a few years old. My lights now are USB charging, so no need to keep buying batteries which given how fast your can get through them otherwise is worth the higher upfront costs.

As for my bike its over 15 years old and whilst I've had to replace tyres, breaks, chain, rear set and a few other parts it's still going strong and still a half decent bike.

I've probably spent less than £50/year on my bike, parts and accessories, and even with the sheds (the new one is less than a year old) and it's about £125 - so less than the "standard" VED cost of £140.

 

[Meerkat]

I fundamentally don't agree. There's just farmland along most main rural routes, and in urban settings you can do it by taking space from cars. London, probably the most space-pressured city in the UK, is making excellent progress here.

Farmland costs money for very few cyclists
London has wide main roads. Finding consistent wide space for bikes, on both sides of the road, and adapting crossings, bus stops, and junctions takes more space than most towns.
In Woking they need to replace a railway bridge and demolish a whole row of shops to do it.

 

[AM9]

Farmland costs money for very few cyclists

But fix the cycle paths and they will be used by a lot more cyclists than 'very few'.

 

[miami]

Farmland costs money

Farmland is really cheap - £10k a mile for a 2.5m wide path.

for very few cyclists

That's not what you said:

So you have a lot of commuters and business drivers being repeatedly held up by people just out for a ride - that’s why they can get impatient and frustrated.

 

[AM9]

It’s not the country, it’s outer suburbia. So you have a lot of commuters and business drivers being repeatedly held up by people just out for a ride - that’s why they can get impatient and frustrated.

The road system is there for everybody who wants to use it. Are you suggesting that access to public highways is based on somebody's (totally unbiased of course! ) 'opinion' as to whether that journey is necessary?

 

[Meerkat]

Farmland is really cheap - £10k a mile for a 2.5m wide path.

Plus building costs. For a handful of users. Will also have issues about digging up hedges etc.

That's not what you said:

If the cycle path network reaches those roads it’s going to cost mountains of cash, and they will have to be very very high standard to get MAMILs on them - not very TdF!

Are you suggesting that access to public highways is based on somebody's (totally unbiased of course! ) 'opinion' as to whether that journey is necessary?

I’m not, I’m just explaining why drivers get the hump.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Plus building costs. For a handful of users. Will also have issues about digging up hedges etc.

If the cycle path network reaches those roads it’s going to cost mountains of cash, and they will have to be very very high standard to get MAMILs on them - not very TdF!

It's not for MAMILs* (or any other type of fast, confident road cyclist), it's for utility cycling. Without it there won't be any utility cycling, because cycling on fast main roads is a really unpleasant experience.

(To be fair I don't get why MAMILs very often choose to cycle on main roads when there's a "yellow road" alternative - they surely don't enjoy it, do they?)

* Middle Aged Men In Lycra

 

[The Ham]

Plus building costs. For a handful of users. Will also have issues about digging up hedges etc

Why would you need to dig up hedges (or at least much of then)? Why not just have the cycle route behind them, maybe even with a second hedge the other side.

 

[stuu]

There generally isn’t room for such facilities (and the sprawling junctions they need to be safe). And they will end up on the road at some point anyway.
large scale utility cycling will only be in town/city where fast roads are rare.

Have a look at aerial views of the Netherlands, and you will see what can be done. There is always room, it just depends on where priorities lie