Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sir Tigger KC]

I wish the cyclists would all wear hi-vis clothing. Passed one on a high speed bike yesterday at dusk no lights and dark clothing.

Yes I think it should be mandatory that Bicyclists wear something hi-viz.    It's not just the MAMIL in black lycra because he thinks he looks cool, but the chap wearing a Barbour jacket and flat cap on his way home from work. 

Often the regardless of using lights and reflectors, they are totally inadequate ineffective at changing the risk posed to cyclists

Fixed to reflect (pun intended) reality.  Not saying that it is ok to ride without lights, I feel vehemently feel the opposite in fact, but I am lit up like a Xmas tree with hi-viz to boot (jacket, gloves and booties) and it makes no difference to the number of people that appear to not see me.  It's either that or they deliberately pull out in front of me or ride so close to put my life at risk.  I am not alone, many cyclists experience the same all year round.

I'm not having a go at bicyclists Monsieur, nor do I want to get into the tit for tat drivers vs cyclists argument. 

It's just a fact that many cyclists could do more to make other road users more aware of their presence, especially at this time of year when the nights draw in during the busy periods. Of course all road users could raise their standards, but the 'Holier than thou' attitude that many Bicyclists have, hinders their cause rather than helps it in my opinion. 

[Andy B]

......
It's just a fact that many cyclists could do more to make other road users more aware of their presence, especially at this time of year when the nights draw in during the busy periods. Of course all road users could raise their standards, but the 'Holier than thou' attitude that many Bicyclists have, hinders their cause rather than helps it in my opinion. 

Same applies to numpty car drivers. This week being the first week that the clocks have changed & it's a little lighter in the morning going to work I've seen loads of pillocks with no lights on ....... obviously as they can see where they're going they don't need to be seen by others. You'd think the fact that street light was on & virtually everyone else had their lights on would be a clue.

[05omegav6]

At risk of being controversial... in a world of neon, day glo, flourescent, led and xenon... would it not be better to simply turn everything off?

It is almost impossible in queuing traffic to see anything at all amongst the glaring cacophony of light...

 

[Gaffers]

I wish the cyclists would all wear hi-vis clothing. Passed one on a high speed bike yesterday at dusk no lights and dark clothing.

Yes I think it should be mandatory that Bicyclists wear something hi-viz.    It's not just the MAMIL in black lycra because he thinks he looks cool, but the chap wearing a Barbour jacket and flat cap on his way home from work. 

Often the regardless of using lights and reflectors, they are totally inadequate ineffective at changing the risk posed to cyclists

Fixed to reflect (pun intended) reality.  Not saying that it is ok to ride without lights, I feel vehemently feel the opposite in fact, but I am lit up like a Xmas tree with hi-viz to boot (jacket, gloves and booties) and it makes no difference to the number of people that appear to not see me.  It's either that or they deliberately pull out in front of me or ride so close to put my life at risk.  I am not alone, many cyclists experience the same all year round.

I'm not having a go at bicyclists Monsieur, nor do I want to get into the tit for tat drivers vs cyclists argument. 

It's just a fact that many cyclists could do more to make other road users more aware of their presence, especially at this time of year when the nights draw in during the busy periods. Of course all road users could raise their standards, but the 'Holier than thou' attitude that many Bicyclists have, hinders their cause rather than helps it in my opinion. 

It's not holier than thou to describe the reality of a situation.

I agree with you, cyclists should at the very least abide by the law on lights and reflectors.  Those that dont get my goat (probably more than you) and I have to fight the urge to roundhouse kick them in the teeth as they go past.   However, many of us go above and beyond the requirements with multiple lights, hi-viz garments and loud audible horns/sirens, obeying the rules etc and yet we still remain invisible to many motorists.  Autumn makes cycling particularly dangerous due to the change in conditions.  The metal manhole cover is now a deathtrap for anyone on two wheels, leaves make cornering and maneuvering more dangerous (as well as getting stuck in brakes) the rain make puddles at the side of the road which nobody wishes to ride through pushing cyclists further out in to the road and in to the path of chagrin with motorists. 

Highlighting this was the intention of my OP to try and present the other person's perspective to those who maybe dont have much experience of it and thus may not fully understand why a cyclist is doing something different in these conditions.

[tigers_gonads]

Banter mode off for a minute ........

Cycles are not compatible with busy city roads.
The roads are just too full nowdays.
It doesn't matter how well lit the cyclist is, how courteously he is riding the cycle, he / she will always get in the way of the motor vehicle driver.
The motor vehicle is a minimum of 1 ton of metal and the driver knows that if he hits a cyclist, the cyclist will come off much worse so he quite simply, the majority of drivers just don't give a toss 
Add to that "the law of the jungle" were nobody likes to be beaten from A to B by some lycra wearing, lentel eating, cycle nazi with a naf helmet camera    who doesn't know or care about the traffic laws then it is only going to end in tears 
Added to the fact that cyclists don't have to carry insurance for when they are using the public highway or pay road fund tax, this only goes even further to piss of the drivers of motor vehicles.

Its a shame because not all cyclists and motor vehicle drivers are complete idiots.
Sadly, its the minority that lets down the others and gives them a bad reputation 

Cities need to setup dedicated cycle routes, well away from the mainstream traffic for the safety of all concerned.
When these routes cross the roads, cyclists need to understand that they must obey the road traffic act and take there turn in a traffic queue with the rest of the road users.

[Kevin Wood]

Banter mode off for a minute ........

Cycles are not compatible with busy city roads.
The roads are just too full nowdays.
It doesn't matter how well lit the cyclist is, how courteously he is riding the cycle, he / she will always get in the way of the motor vehicle driver.
...

As does the car in front, 99.9% of the time. They both have an equal right to be using that bit of the road, so who's to say which mode of transport is "compatible" with the road or not?

[tigers_gonads]

Banter mode off for a minute ........

Cycles are not compatible with busy city roads.
The roads are just too full nowdays.
It doesn't matter how well lit the cyclist is, how courteously he is riding the cycle, he / she will always get in the way of the motor vehicle driver.
...

As does the car in front, 99.9% of the time. They both have an equal right to be using that bit of the road, so who's to say which mode of transport is "compatible" with the road or not?

I'm not saying what's right or wrong here Kev.
In the ideal world, people wouldn't argue, fight, lie, cheat ect but human nature state we all do these things.
Its in our DNA so to speak.
The human being hates been told what to do because he / she is always right.
Hates change been forced onto anything.
It doesn't matter whether its morally good change or bad, its irrelevant.

The problem is imho, nobody really wants to travel on the roads in question.
Its sadly a fact that if you want to get from A to B, you have to use Road C and if Road C is a mass of congested lumps of metal then human nature / Darwin's law / Law of the jungle kicks in and we all end up battling for the same piece of tarmac 

Equal rules of the road and punishment for breaking those rules would be a start but I can't see that happening because nobody in power has the gonads to pish one group off and call it the way it is in the real work.
At the end of the day, those who make the rules don't really give a shit about things like this .............. they just want your vote so they can stay on the gravy train 

[Nick W]

Banter mode off for a minute ........

Cycles are not compatible with busy city roads.
The roads are just too full nowdays.
It doesn't matter how well lit the cyclist is, how courteously he is riding the cycle, he / she will always get in the way of the motor vehicle driver.
The motor vehicle is a minimum of 1 ton of metal and the driver knows that if he hits a cyclist, the cyclist will come off much worse so he quite simply, the majority of drivers just don't give a toss 
Add to that "the law of the jungle" were nobody likes to be beaten from A to B by some lycra wearing, lentel eating, cycle nazi with a naf helmet camera    who doesn't know or care about the traffic laws then it is only going to end in tears 
Added to the fact that cyclists don't have to carry insurance for when they are using the public highway or pay road fund tax, this only goes even further to piss of the drivers of motor vehicles.

Its a shame because not all cyclists and motor vehicle drivers are complete idiots.
Sadly, its the minority that lets down the others and gives them a bad reputation 

Cities need to setup dedicated cycle routes, well away from the mainstream traffic for the safety of all concerned.
When these routes cross the roads, cyclists need to understand that they must obey the road traffic act and take there turn in a traffic queue with the rest of the road users.

You have your first point back-to-front: today's roads are not compatible with the volume of traffic that expects to use them. There is no cure for this; we cannot build more roads as we don't have space for them. This applies to motorways, dual carriageways, rural by-passes and all other roads. Looking at it from the other direction; we cannot reduce the amount of traffic, as that would require a fundamental change in the way we live and travel. Just look at how effectively big city congestion charges reduce the amount of traffic.


Your description of cyclists highlights your bias, and I doubt anything could change that.


As for dedicated,separate cycle routes, they simply aren't practical. If there is room for a cycle route, then there is room to expand the road. How many city roads do you know where that is the case? Then there is the cost; the economics are utterly against the idea. You clearly haven't used a bike on many of the existing cycle routes as many of them are so badly designed/maintained/ integrated with the roads that using them is much more dangerous than riding on the road. And the junctions are by far the most dangerous areas.


Finally, there is the competence of many road users whether they're in a car, truck, bike, motorcycle or pedestrians. Some of them are so dangerous they shouldn't be allowed to get out of bed in the morning. The only way around this would be the Judge Dredd approach of executing transgressors on the spot, and who wants to live like that?

[Mr Gav]

Banter mode off for a minute ........

Cycles are not compatible with busy city roads.
The roads are just too full nowdays.
It doesn't matter how well lit the cyclist is, how courteously he is riding the cycle, he / she will always get in the way of the motor vehicle driver.
The motor vehicle is a minimum of 1 ton of metal and the driver knows that if he hits a cyclist, the cyclist will come off much worse so he quite simply, the majority of drivers just don't give a toss 
Add to that "the law of the jungle" were nobody likes to be beaten from A to B by some lycra wearing, lentel eating, cycle nazi with a naf helmet camera    who doesn't know or care about the traffic laws then it is only going to end in tears 
Added to the fact that cyclists don't have to carry insurance for when they are using the public highway or pay road fund tax, this only goes even further to piss of the drivers of motor vehicles.

Its a shame because not all cyclists and motor vehicle drivers are complete idiots.
Sadly, its the minority that lets down the others and gives them a bad reputation 

Cities need to setup dedicated cycle routes, well away from the mainstream traffic for the safety of all concerned.
When these routes cross the roads, cyclists need to understand that they must obey the road traffic act and take there turn in a traffic queue with the rest of the road users.

You have your first point back-to-front: today's roads are not compatible with the volume of traffic that expects to use them. There is no cure for this; we cannot build more roads as we don't have space for them. This applies to motorways, dual carriageways, rural by-passes and all other roads. Looking at it from the other direction; we cannot reduce the amount of traffic, as that would require a fundamental change in the way we live and travel. Just look at how effectively big city congestion charges reduce the amount of traffic.


Your description of cyclists highlights your bias, and I doubt anything could change that.


As for dedicated,separate cycle routes, they simply aren't practical. If there is room for a cycle route, then there is room to expand the road. How many city roads do you know where that is the case? Then there is the cost; the economics are utterly against the idea. You clearly haven't used a bike on many of the existing cycle routes as many of them are so badly designed/maintained/ integrated with the roads that using them is much more dangerous than riding on the road. And the junctions are by far the most dangerous areas.


Finally, there is the competence of many road users whether they're in a car, truck, bike, motorcycle or pedestrians. Some of them are so dangerous they shouldn't be allowed to get out of bed in the morning. The only way around this would be the Judge Dredd approach of executing transgressors on the spot, and who wants to live like that?

Go to Malmo in Sweden or Copenhagen then come back and say it isn`t practical 

[tigers_gonads]

Banter mode off for a minute ........

Cycles are not compatible with busy city roads.
The roads are just too full nowdays.
It doesn't matter how well lit the cyclist is, how courteously he is riding the cycle, he / she will always get in the way of the motor vehicle driver.
The motor vehicle is a minimum of 1 ton of metal and the driver knows that if he hits a cyclist, the cyclist will come off much worse so he quite simply, the majority of drivers just don't give a toss 
Add to that "the law of the jungle" were nobody likes to be beaten from A to B by some lycra wearing, lentel eating, cycle nazi with a naf helmet camera    who doesn't know or care about the traffic laws then it is only going to end in tears 
Added to the fact that cyclists don't have to carry insurance for when they are using the public highway or pay road fund tax, this only goes even further to piss of the drivers of motor vehicles.

Its a shame because not all cyclists and motor vehicle drivers are complete idiots.
Sadly, its the minority that lets down the others and gives them a bad reputation 

Cities need to setup dedicated cycle routes, well away from the mainstream traffic for the safety of all concerned.
When these routes cross the roads, cyclists need to understand that they must obey the road traffic act and take there turn in a traffic queue with the rest of the road users.

You have your first point back-to-front: today's roads are not compatible with the volume of traffic that expects to use them. There is no cure for this; we cannot build more roads as we don't have space for them. This applies to motorways, dual carriageways, rural by-passes and all other roads. Looking at it from the other direction; we cannot reduce the amount of traffic, as that would require a fundamental change in the way we live and travel. Just look at how effectively big city congestion charges reduce the amount of traffic.


Your description of cyclists highlights your bias, and I doubt anything could change that.


As for dedicated,separate cycle routes, they simply aren't practical. If there is room for a cycle route, then there is room to expand the road. How many city roads do you know where that is the case? Then there is the cost; the economics are utterly against the idea. You clearly haven't used a bike on many of the existing cycle routes as many of them are so badly designed/maintained/ integrated with the roads that using them is much more dangerous than riding on the road. And the junctions are by far the most dangerous areas.


Finally, there is the competence of many road users whether they're in a car, truck, bike, motorcycle or pedestrians. Some of them are so dangerous they shouldn't be allowed to get out of bed in the morning. The only way around this would be the Judge Dredd approach of executing transgressors on the spot, and who wants to live like that?

Point 1

I'll let you into a little secret Nick 
I'm 50 years old in January and I can honestly say, I haven't ridden a pushbike since 1989 when I was young, very fit and not a balding, fat bastard like I am now 
This summer, me and the missus bought a couple of old banger pushbikes from the women in the office at the caravan site we use in Skegness. Both cost me 30 quid so you can imagine what sort in condition they are in but the wheels are round and the tyres had air in them so I thought opps it and took the plunge  I lost half a stone in 8 days and loved riding around the country roads with my rucksack full of cold meat and cold beer drinks 
Riding a pushbike out on open roads were there is space was great, it really was 

Would I ride a pushbike in a built up city centre ??   Would I opps for the reasons I have said 



Point 2

I love driving.
Imo, I honestly believe i'm a bloody good driver even though I do feel like having a "Ronnie Pickering" moment most days with some of the arseholes on 2 and 4 wheels out there.
As for Judge Dread moment    In todays pc world we live in, he'd never get a firearms licence  but a nice idea though ................

As long as he shoots cyclists first 



Just in case you don't know who Ronnie Pickering is ...................

Enjoy 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0dcv6GKNNw

[steve6367]

Banter mode off for a minute ........

Cycles are not compatible with busy city roads.
The roads are just too full nowdays.
It doesn't matter how well lit the cyclist is, how courteously he is riding the cycle, he / she will always get in the way of the motor vehicle driver.
...

For me it's a practical thing, there are a lot of cars all doing broadly the same speed and a very small number of bikes doing a completely different speed. I'm not saying either has any more or less 'right' to be there but practically the current system (certainly in Bournemouth) is not working.

[Nick W]

Banter mode off for a minute ........

Cycles are not compatible with busy city roads.
The roads are just too full nowdays.
It doesn't matter how well lit the cyclist is, how courteously he is riding the cycle, he / she will always get in the way of the motor vehicle driver.
The motor vehicle is a minimum of 1 ton of metal and the driver knows that if he hits a cyclist, the cyclist will come off much worse so he quite simply, the majority of drivers just don't give a toss 
Add to that "the law of the jungle" were nobody likes to be beaten from A to B by some lycra wearing, lentel eating, cycle nazi with a naf helmet camera    who doesn't know or care about the traffic laws then it is only going to end in tears 
Added to the fact that cyclists don't have to carry insurance for when they are using the public highway or pay road fund tax, this only goes even further to piss of the drivers of motor vehicles.

Its a shame because not all cyclists and motor vehicle drivers are complete idiots.
Sadly, its the minority that lets down the others and gives them a bad reputation 

Cities need to setup dedicated cycle routes, well away from the mainstream traffic for the safety of all concerned.
When these routes cross the roads, cyclists need to understand that they must obey the road traffic act and take there turn in a traffic queue with the rest of the road users.

You have your first point back-to-front: today's roads are not compatible with the volume of traffic that expects to use them. There is no cure for this; we cannot build more roads as we don't have space for them. This applies to motorways, dual carriageways, rural by-passes and all other roads. Looking at it from the other direction; we cannot reduce the amount of traffic, as that would require a fundamental change in the way we live and travel. Just look at how effectively big city congestion charges reduce the amount of traffic.


Your description of cyclists highlights your bias, and I doubt anything could change that.


As for dedicated,separate cycle routes, they simply aren't practical. If there is room for a cycle route, then there is room to expand the road. How many city roads do you know where that is the case? Then there is the cost; the economics are utterly against the idea. You clearly haven't used a bike on many of the existing cycle routes as many of them are so badly designed/maintained/ integrated with the roads that using them is much more dangerous than riding on the road. And the junctions are by far the most dangerous areas.


Finally, there is the competence of many road users whether they're in a car, truck, bike, motorcycle or pedestrians. Some of them are so dangerous they shouldn't be allowed to get out of bed in the morning. The only way around this would be the Judge Dredd approach of executing transgressors on the spot, and who wants to live like that?

Go to Malmo in Sweden or Copenhagen then come back and say it isn`t practical 

Sweden has  a population of 9.5million and an land area nearly twice that of the UK. The population of London is about 8.5million.  The biggest Swedish cities are smaller than many British towns. Not much of a comparison!

[tigers_gonads]

Banter mode off for a minute ........

Cycles are not compatible with busy city roads.
The roads are just too full nowdays.
It doesn't matter how well lit the cyclist is, how courteously he is riding the cycle, he / she will always get in the way of the motor vehicle driver.
The motor vehicle is a minimum of 1 ton of metal and the driver knows that if he hits a cyclist, the cyclist will come off much worse so he quite simply, the majority of drivers just don't give a toss 
Add to that "the law of the jungle" were nobody likes to be beaten from A to B by some lycra wearing, lentel eating, cycle nazi with a naf helmet camera    who doesn't know or care about the traffic laws then it is only going to end in tears 
Added to the fact that cyclists don't have to carry insurance for when they are using the public highway or pay road fund tax, this only goes even further to piss of the drivers of motor vehicles.

Its a shame because not all cyclists and motor vehicle drivers are complete idiots.
Sadly, its the minority that lets down the others and gives them a bad reputation 

Cities need to setup dedicated cycle routes, well away from the mainstream traffic for the safety of all concerned.
When these routes cross the roads, cyclists need to understand that they must obey the road traffic act and take there turn in a traffic queue with the rest of the road users.

You have your first point back-to-front: today's roads are not compatible with the volume of traffic that expects to use them. There is no cure for this; we cannot build more roads as we don't have space for them. This applies to motorways, dual carriageways, rural by-passes and all other roads. Looking at it from the other direction; we cannot reduce the amount of traffic, as that would require a fundamental change in the way we live and travel. Just look at how effectively big city congestion charges reduce the amount of traffic.


Your description of cyclists highlights your bias, and I doubt anything could change that.


As for dedicated,separate cycle routes, they simply aren't practical. If there is room for a cycle route, then there is room to expand the road. How many city roads do you know where that is the case? Then there is the cost; the economics are utterly against the idea. You clearly haven't used a bike on many of the existing cycle routes as many of them are so badly designed/maintained/ integrated with the roads that using them is much more dangerous than riding on the road. And the junctions are by far the most dangerous areas.


Finally, there is the competence of many road users whether they're in a car, truck, bike, motorcycle or pedestrians. Some of them are so dangerous they shouldn't be allowed to get out of bed in the morning. The only way around this would be the Judge Dredd approach of executing transgressors on the spot, and who wants to live like that?

Go to Malmo in Sweden or Copenhagen then come back and say it isn`t practical 

Sweden has  a population of 9.5million and an land area nearly twice that of the UK. The population of London is about 8.5million.  The biggest Swedish cities are smaller than many British towns. Not much of a comparison!

Quick
Somebody start a "kick out the immigrants so we have more room for cyclists" thread 

[Sir Tigger KC]

Bicycling threads seem to inflame more passion on here than a night with Kelly Brook!     

Although I have to say that Monsieur Guffer's efforts here to raise awareness of Bicyclist issues have probably made me a bit more thoughtful when I see one.    So well done for that Monsieur! 

If I don't see him though because he hasn't got any lights, reflectors or hi-viz then I just happily knock the bastard in the hedge!   

[STEMO]

Anyone who goes out on a bike on the cold, wet dark nights obviously has given up on life anyway.