Cyclists !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Innocent Bystander posted:

Drewy posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

Drewy posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

 

But if we are to have an increase in the number of cyclists, then queues of cars are going to find themselves trailing behind more and more relatively slow bikes, bringing the town to a near standstill.

The answer is for the car drivers to use bikes - less congestion as they take up,less space, so better progress and less frustration, no pollution, costbsaving etc etc

Cyclists don't cause congestion, cars do. Where there's congestion there are bikes overtaking cars. 

I disagree. Cyclists, in the situation described, are the root cause of the described congestion.

Thought you might

Reality check:

M6 through Bimingham: congestion virtually 24hours a day 365 days a year. Cause: cyclists simultaneously choosing to stop and have a chinwag with their bikes blocking the exits of all exit sliproads.

M40 from the M25 junction into London every morning. Cause: one cyclist in Marylebone occupying keeping clear of pedestians stepping into the road, so effectively occupying the whole inner lane (of 3)

A4 at Heathrow approaching London every morning. Cause: one cyclist in Brentford having to use the road because of parked cars on the cycle lane (This road, the Great West Road as it was called, was built in the 1930s with a dedicated cycle lane - and so safe enough for kids like me to cycle to school in our teens 30 years or more later, though in practice I usually went by Tube because it was quicker and less trouble carrying my case full of books. Last time I visited the area, admittedly a few years ago now, the cycle lane was chockablock with parked cars.)

Yes, clearly all congestion is caused by inconsiderate cyclists.

Crikey, even I didn't realise just how devastating an effect one or two cyclists can have on our road system. Makes £2k pa look like peanuts...........but I agree that the old A4 cycle lane should be re-dedicated to cyclists and the parked cars moved. A bit like the A1 in Co Durham which is now downgraded but still a heavily used local road, which still has its dedicated cycle lanes. Struck me as a really good idea in my youth. But never fully utilised, I wonder why ?

Coming late to this thread.

I find it amusing and disturbing that on a lot of social media, the rampant theme about tax and insurance of cyclists is spouted as a cure for bad behaviour of (pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists)- sort out the behaviour first and all taxes I pay will be used for better things, i.e. not for consuming the health and emeregy services to deal with accidents.

i don't buy into the argument that the employment enabled by the motor industry means that it's ok to have a need all that goes with maintains a road network and all that goes with it - the need to use cars differently will be here much sooner than most think - public transport and stuff like cycling is the way ahead.

Well, it happened again today ! Bloody mindless cyclists !!

Daughter No 3 was assaulted (not by a cyclist) and son-in-law unlawfully imprisoned (not by the police). Myself and Mrs D went up to Richmond (Surrey) and got things sorted out.

We decided on a walk along the Thames (to help them recover from their ordeal) from Ham House (you can park for free by the river) to Teddington Lock, then back along the path to Richmond for dinner and again back to Ham House to pick up the cars.

There were quite a few others strolling along the path and a fair number of cyclists too.

Now I didn’t do a headcount survey, but about half the cyclists we riding far too fast, dinging their bells and weaving between the pedestrians like motor cyclists in a traffic jam ! They certainly expected pedestrians to get out of their way ! Fortunately, this time we didn’t have any grandchildren with us ! They tend to run around, and it’s a bit like herding rabbits to keep them together !

Why ?, why the bloody rush ? most of these rushing cyclists were wearing earphones, some had loudspeakers, a few were on their mobile phones and one chap was doing wheelies. Their numbers varied from solo cyclists, pairs and packs of up to six.

What is it that drives these morons to do these things and thus give cyclists such a bad name ?

Don.

That was a bit of an anti climax, when you got to the part where you told us you didn’t have your grandchildren with you, I was convinced the next sentence would be “ So I twa*ttted one of them”

Is this a southern phenomenon, I live between Liverpool and Manchester, been pottering about on my bike for decades, I’ve never seen behaviour like that. Could it simply be down to the fact, in London there are too many people in too little space.

I’ve also never seen dog poo bags discarded until a couple of days ago, I spotted one at the side of a private road used by cyclists and dog walkers. There was only one dog walker, so I had an idea who the culprit was, however, when I cycled back down the road on my way back home twenty minutes later, the bag had gone. Presumably it was collected by the dog walker.

Have you considered moving up north.

I

I could ride down this stretch of the canal for 3 of 4 miles and be lucky to come across a walker or cyclist.

Don Atkinson posted:

Well, it happened again today ! Bloody mindless cyclists !!

.

There were quite a few others strolling along the path and a fair number of cyclists too.

Now I didn’t do a headcount survey, but about half the cyclists we riding far too fast, dinging their bells and weaving between the pedestrians like motor cyclists in a traffic jam ! They certainly expected pedestrians to get out of their way ! Fortunately, this time we didn’t have any grandchildren with us ! They tend to run around, and it’s a bit like herding rabbits to keep them together !

Why ?, why the bloody rush ? most of these rushing cyclists were wearing earphones, some had loudspeakers, a few were on their mobile phones and one chap was doing wheelies. Their numbers varied from solo cyclists, pairs and packs of up to six.

What is it that drives these morons to do these things and thus give cyclists such a bad name ?

I don't know what speed these cyclists were doing - what speed are you expecting them to do? A walker may look at a map and say that looks a good route, we can do that in 2 or 3 hrs, or whatever - a cyclist will do much the same, but simply look at a factor of maybe 3 or 4 further in the same time, because that's what bikes do, 3-4 times the speed of walking for the same energy. And just as when walking one will come across runners going two or three times as fast, there will be the equivalent among cyclists. Yes, they should all be courteous to other users of the path, and the faster they are going the more care they must take, including being prepared to slow down or even stop on occasion on a shared path, but IF the path is intended for cycling as well as walking it is not unreasonable for cyclists to expect to cycle at what they consider to be a reasonable speeed, and also expect courtesy from pedestrians to allow passing. That IF is of course key in this.

maybe it would help if paths designated for joint use were to clarify which user group has dominance - pedesrians give way to cyclists, or vice versa.

fatcat posted:

Don.

That was a bit of an anti climax, when you got to the part where you told us you didn’t have your grandchildren with you, I was convinced the next sentence would be “ So I twa*ttted one of them”

Is this a southern phenomenon, I live between Liverpool and Manchester, been pottering about on my bike for decades, I’ve never seen behaviour like that. Could it simply be down to the fact, in London there are too many people in too little space.

I’ve also never seen dog poo bags discarded until a couple of days ago, I spotted one at the side of a private road used by cyclists and dog walkers. There was only one dog walker, so I had an idea who the culprit was, however, when I cycled back down the road on my way back home twenty minutes later, the bag had gone. Presumably it was collected by the dog walker.

Have you considered moving up north.

I

I could ride down this stretch of the canal for 3 of 4 miles and be lucky to come across a walker or cyclist.

That's a very nice picture Frank !

Apologies for the anticlimax !

Well, I was born and brought up in the North East (Chester-le-Street) and for sure, the Northern Pennines, Yorkshire Dales and the Cheviots were quite devoid of people. But the large conurbations of Newcastle, Gateshead, Sunderland and Teeside were just as densely populated as parts of London. Work brought me down here and work and family keeps me here. "Get on yer bike" was a political phrase I seem to recall ? Quite ironic

If I were going to re-locate it would probably be to the Canadian Rockies where part of my family already live.

Anyways, the Kennet and Avon canal can be quiet and peaceful, and you can sometimes go for a few hours without encountering a cyclist. But then, other days you could be crashed into every 10 minutes or so by a mindless prat on a bike !!

I don't go up to London very often these days, but yesterday was an unexpected exception. And yes, I think part of the problem is too many people in too little space. The other part is the lack of common decency in a larger proportion of those people.

Innocent Bystander posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

Well, it happened again today ! Bloody mindless cyclists !!

.

There were quite a few others strolling along the path and a fair number of cyclists too.

Now I didn’t do a headcount survey, but about half the cyclists we riding far too fast, dinging their bells and weaving between the pedestrians like motor cyclists in a traffic jam ! They certainly expected pedestrians to get out of their way ! Fortunately, this time we didn’t have any grandchildren with us ! They tend to run around, and it’s a bit like herding rabbits to keep them together !

Why ?, why the bloody rush ? most of these rushing cyclists were wearing earphones, some had loudspeakers, a few were on their mobile phones and one chap was doing wheelies. Their numbers varied from solo cyclists, pairs and packs of up to six.

What is it that drives these morons to do these things and thus give cyclists such a bad name ?

I don't know what speed these cyclists were doing - what speed are you expecting them to do?  Half of them went past slowly and carefully, the other half i guess were doing about 15 mph and determined to maintain their speed and direction - pedestrians get out of my way ! A walker may look at a map and say that looks a good route, we can do that in 2 or 3 hrs, or whatever - a cyclist will do much the same, but simply look at a factor of maybe 3 or 4 further in the same time, because that's what bikes do, 3-4 times the speed of walking for the same energy. Yep, that's more or less what I do ! And just as when walking one will come across runners going two or three times as fast, there will be the equivalent among cyclists. Agreed.  Yes, they should all be courteous to other users of the path, and the faster they are going the more care they must take, we seem to be pretty well agreed so far including being prepared to slow down or even stop on occasion on a shared path, We really are agreed. Its just a pity that half the cyclists we encountered yesterday, didn't ! but IF the path is intended for cycling as well as walking it is not unreasonable for cyclists to expect to cycle at what they consider to be a reasonable speeed, and also expect courtesy from pedestrians to allow passing. Well, that length of path is clearly a joint use route, but in the same way as car drivers should take care when encountering road cyclists, I consider path-cyclists should take care when encountering pedestrians - simply ringing a bell at high-speed isn't good enough ! that's about as bad as a motorist tooting their horn at a road cyclist ! That IF is of course key in this.

maybe it would help if paths designated for joint use were to clarify which user group has dominance - pedesrians give way to cyclists, or vice versa. Hmmmm, possibly.........hhmmmm.......on balance, no. I think the cyclist has the greater obligation ! that's how I feel when i'm on my bike and I think the car driver has the greater obligation on a road vis a vie cyclists.

 

There is good argument for pedestrian giving way to cyclist on narrow paths, from a physical practical point of view, not courtesy (which applies to both parties): in a small space a pedestrian can more easily step to one side than can a cyclist who may have to stop, dismount and manouvre the bike, and pedestrian can fit into a smaller space to the side of a path, and better step over a rock or a ditch etc. Also the delay to a pedestrian in so doing is less than to a cyclist, because a pedestrian is back to full momentum virtually instantly.

On wider paths where there is room to pass though not when either are abreast, then both should be orepared to walk/cycle in single file when they meet.

 But if it is a cycle path on which pedestrians are tolerated, or vice versa, that should be made clear.

As noted above, I had to go up to London on Saturday. As usual I drove and parked on the outskirts, Ham House to be precise.

My daughter and son-in-law usually cycle from Wimbledon to Waterloo each day to work. They use off-road routes through parks and along the river. So I discussed routes they might consider if they were to move further out of town.

It struck me that there is already the makings of a cycle route from Kingston (and beyond) along the south bank of the river, all the way to the Thames Barrier.

There is also the making of a route along the Grand Union canal to the north of the city. I’ve walked parts of that between Bethnel Green area and King’s Cross.

An idea is forming in my head that without too much effort, a framework of cycle-ways could be formed to give cyclists good access to the N, S, E and W of the city of London and Westminster. OK, so like a train commuter, once on the perimeter of these cities, bikes would have to be parked (or wheeled) and the rider would walk or use the underground system to reach their office or place of employment.

This would keep motor vehicles and cyclists apart AND.....could be designed to keep cyclists and pedestrian apart

And for a miserable £2k pa per cyclist going into the Chancellor's coffers, I’m sure the funding could be made available from general taxation……..

……thoughts ???

Oh dear, I'm nearly in agreement with Don re cyclng on towpaths!!  There is a stretch in London from Islington towards Olympic Park which I had to use first thing in the morning on my way to the Ride 100 start the past two years.  And I have to admit, even though first thing in the morning, with almost no other people around, my heart was in my mouth a few times - the tow path was barely wide enough in places for single way cycling never mind pedestrians with kids. On this particular stretch, if cyclists are permitted, which I believe they are, the rules of that particular path ought to be cyclists must yield to pedestrians in order to avoid unwanted swimming lessons.  Another example where general rules need to be set aside for common sense.

Peter

Innocent Bystander posted:

There is good argument for pedestrian giving way to cyclist on narrow paths, from a physical practical point of view, not courtesy (which applies to both parties): in a small space a pedestrian can more easily step to one side than can a cyclist who may have to stop, dismount and manouvre the bike, well, that is what I tend to do, even if it means a slight "inconvenience" to me  and pedestrian can fit into a smaller space to the side of a path, and better step over a rock or a ditch etc. Also the delay to a pedestrian in so doing is less than to a cyclist, because a pedestrian is back to full momentum virtually instantly. It could work (and does seem to be expected) where cyclists are few and far between, but not on "busy" days - the walkers would forever be "stepping aside"

On wider paths where there is room to pass though not when either are abreast, then both should be orepared to walk/cycle in single file when they meet. We do that when walking, but even then I expect cyclists to slow down to pass, and many don't !!

 But if it is a cycle path on which pedestrians are tolerated, or vice versa, that should be made clear.

Don Atkinson posted:

Well, it happened again today ! Bloody mindless cyclists !!

Daughter No 3 was assaulted (not by a cyclist) and son-in-law unlawfully imprisoned (not by the police). Myself and Mrs D went up to Richmond (Surrey) and got things sorted out.

We decided on a walk along the Thames (to help them recover from their ordeal) from Ham House (you can park for free by the river) to Teddington Lock, then back along the path to Richmond for dinner and again back to Ham House to pick up the cars.

There were quite a few others strolling along the path and a fair number of cyclists too.

Now I didn’t do a headcount survey, but about half the cyclists we riding far too fast, dinging their bells and weaving between the pedestrians like motor cyclists in a traffic jam ! They certainly expected pedestrians to get out of their way ! Fortunately, this time we didn’t have any grandchildren with us ! They tend to run around, and it’s a bit like herding rabbits to keep them together !

Why ?, why the bloody rush ? most of these rushing cyclists were wearing earphones, some had loudspeakers, a few were on their mobile phones and one chap was doing wheelies. Their numbers varied from solo cyclists, pairs and packs of up to six.

What is it that drives these morons to do these things and thus give cyclists such a bad name ?

Well, it happened again today ! Bloody mindless motorists !!

I decided to cycle to work like I do nearly every day.

There were quite a few others cycling along along the road and a fair number of motorists too.

Now I didn’t do a headcount survey, but about half the motorists were driving far too fast, sounding their horns, revving their engines and squeezing past the cyclists like motor cyclists in a traffic jam ! They certainly expected cyclists to get out of their way ! Fortunately, this time we didn’t have any children with us ! They tend to cycle a little unpredictably, and it’s a bit like herding rabbits to keep them together !

Why ?, why the bloody rush ? Most of these rushing motorists were listening to music, some had loudspeakers, a few were on their mobile phones, and many were staring at their crotch (what's that about?)  but none were doing wheelies. Their numbers varied from solo motorists, pairs and packs of up to six.

What is it that drives these morons to do these things and thus give motorists such a bad name ?

Don Atkinson posted:

 

And for a miserable £2k pa per cyclist going into the Chancellor's coffers, I’m sure the funding could be made available from general taxation……..

……thoughts ???

Well as you've repeatedly had them we can only conclude that you're beyond help. You may have noticed that not one person has come anywhere close to agreeing with you that a £2000 tax to ride a bike is even close to being a good idea, let alone workable.

Are you just going to keep posting, till someone agrees with you? Might be a long wait Don. When too many people think that even £90 for a nasty cheap Chinese import bike from Tesco made of scaffolding tubes & tractor tyres is too much to pay for a bike, the idea that adding on two grand to ride it in the morning & the evening is a non-starter. But you know that; like I said you're just pulling our chains hoping to get a bite.

Nice try Don, but the joke's over. Cheers.

winkyincanada posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

Well, it happened again today ! Bloody mindless cyclists !!

Daughter No 3 was assaulted (not by a cyclist) and son-in-law unlawfully imprisoned (not by the police). Myself and Mrs D went up to Richmond (Surrey) and got things sorted out.

We decided on a walk along the Thames (to help them recover from their ordeal) from Ham House (you can park for free by the river) to Teddington Lock, then back along the path to Richmond for dinner and again back to Ham House to pick up the cars.

There were quite a few others strolling along the path and a fair number of cyclists too.

Now I didn’t do a headcount survey, but about half the cyclists we riding far too fast, dinging their bells and weaving between the pedestrians like motor cyclists in a traffic jam ! They certainly expected pedestrians to get out of their way ! Fortunately, this time we didn’t have any grandchildren with us ! They tend to run around, and it’s a bit like herding rabbits to keep them together !

Why ?, why the bloody rush ? most of these rushing cyclists were wearing earphones, some had loudspeakers, a few were on their mobile phones and one chap was doing wheelies. Their numbers varied from solo cyclists, pairs and packs of up to six.

What is it that drives these morons to do these things and thus give cyclists such a bad name ?

Well, it happened again today ! Bloody mindless motorists !!

I decided to cycle to work like I do nearly every day.

There were quite a few others cycling along along the road and a fair number of motorists too.

Now I didn’t do a headcount survey, but about half the motorists were driving far too fast, sounding their horns, revving their engines and squeezing past the cyclists like motor cyclists in a traffic jam ! They certainly expected cyclists to get out of their way ! Fortunately, this time we didn’t have any children with us ! They tend to cycle a little unpredictably, and it’s a bit like herding rabbits to keep them together !

Why ?, why the bloody rush ? Most of these rushing motorists were listening to music, some had loudspeakers, a few were on their mobile phones, and many were staring at their crotch (what's that about?)  but none were doing wheelies. Their numbers varied from solo motorists, pairs and packs of up to six.

What is it that drives these morons to do these things and thus give motorists such a bad name ?

Predictable, as always winky. You never let the side down and never apologise. Keep up the good work.

ChrisR_EPL posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

 

And for a miserable £2k pa per cyclist going into the Chancellor's coffers, I’m sure the funding could be made available from general taxation……..

……thoughts ???

Well as you've repeatedly had them we can only conclude that you're beyond help. You may have noticed that not one person has come anywhere close to agreeing with you that a £2000 tax to ride a bike is even close to being a good idea, let alone workable.

Are you just going to keep posting, till someone agrees with you? Might be a long wait Don. When too many people think that even £90 for a nasty cheap Chinese import bike from Tesco made of scaffolding tubes & tractor tyres is too much to pay for a bike, the idea that adding on two grand to ride it in the morning & the evening is a non-starter. But you know that; like I said you're just pulling our chains hoping to get a bite.

Nice try Don, but the joke's over. Cheers.

Well, of course I am disappointed. When I wrote "thoughts ?" I had in mind "thoughts about the other six paragraphs".

I already know that people on this forum, who own hifi costing upwards of £10k think £2k pa to ride a bike on our roads is a bit steep. You know how I arrived at £2k pa. You know its the tax that the Gov would have to charge cyclists if we did away with cars and raised the revenue from cyclists instead. You simply don't want to have to pay it. Understandable, but selfish !

Anyway, what are your thoughts about the idea outlined in the other six paragraphs ?

northpole posted:

Oh dear, I'm nearly in agreement with Don re cyclng on towpaths!!  There is a stretch in London from Islington towards Olympic Park which I had to use first thing in the morning on my way to the Ride 100 start the past two years.  And I have to admit, even though first thing in the morning, with almost no other people around, my heart was in my mouth a few times - the tow path was barely wide enough in places for single way cycling never mind pedestrians with kids. On this particular stretch, if cyclists are permitted, which I believe they are, the rules of that particular path ought to be cyclists must yield to pedestrians in order to avoid unwanted swimming lessons.  Another example where general rules need to be set aside for common sense.

Peter

Don't worry Peter. Just because you might agree with me about towpaths is no reason to agree with me about anything else !

I used to frequently walk from the A10, along the canal path to Vincent Street. My daughter used to work for a firm of architects PTE Associates who are based at the canal end of Graham Street.

The number of cyclists who used to duck their heads and continue to cycle beneath the arched bridges over the canal towpath was astonishing, even though the signs asked them to dismount. How cyclists or pedestrians didn't end up swimming was pure luck !

Don Atkinson posted:

Well, of course I am disappointed. When I wrote "thoughts ?" I had in mind "thoughts about the other six paragraphs".

I already know that people on this forum, who own hifi costing upwards of £10k think £2k pa to ride a bike on our roads is a bit steep. You know how I arrived at £2k pa. You know its the tax that the Gov would have to charge cyclists if we did away with cars and raised the revenue from cyclists instead. You simply don't want to have to pay it. Understandable, but selfish !

Anyway, what are your thoughts about the idea outlined in the other six paragraphs ?

The other six paragraphs seem to be rehashes of your desperation to separate cyclists from other road users, which many posters have pointed is a non-issue away from the very busiest roads. Most roads present no problems for cyclists or drivers. Your outpouring is also very London-centric and as I don't go into town that often and certainly not in the ares you keep describing almost as war zones, I don't know. I could have a wild stab at an answer like you have Don, but yours have been a bit ridiculous so I won't bother thanks.

You've completely and deliberately ignored the idea that govts use tax to drive behaviour as well as to raise money, and you haven't once addressed how adding £2000 to the cost of cycling to work comes anywhere close [clue; it's not even on the same planet Don] to fitting in with the UK govt's policies on health, congestion, pollution, and the NHS. You just gave in and said 'nice rant', which shows you have no clue. 

Good trolling Don. I'll have a look in a bit to see how you've sidestepped this one. Keep it up.

Shared paths are an issue. A cyclist should give some warning rather than rushing past, go pacestrians a chance to respond, as a matter of courtesy and avoiding a potential collision.

However, this assumes that the padestrian is not wearing headphones/has their dog(s) on a very long leash across the pathway/ or walking side by side with a prams/ on their mobile phone/ does not have control of their children - and of course has the sense to respnd when a cyclist rings their bell  or says something 'like 'on the right"

The worst thing I've encountered on a shared is a cyclist with headphone/mobile phone and a dog on a leash at the same time.

Second worse thing is a dog not on a lead.

Of course at the end of the day, iIt's a matter of perception whether thisse acts by pedestrians and cyclist are dangerous - annoying and concerning - for sure.  Unsafe ? 

The buggest killer and consumer of public resources are motorists.

ChrisR_EPL posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

Well, of course I am disappointed. When I wrote "thoughts ?" I had in mind "thoughts about the other six paragraphs".

I already know that people on this forum, who own hifi costing upwards of £10k think £2k pa to ride a bike on our roads is a bit steep. You know how I arrived at £2k pa. You know its the tax that the Gov would have to charge cyclists if we did away with cars and raised the revenue from cyclists instead. You simply don't want to have to pay it. Understandable, but selfish !

Anyway, what are your thoughts about the idea outlined in the other six paragraphs ?

The other six paragraphs seem to be rehashes of your desperation no desperation, just a proposal for consideration  to separate cyclists from other road users, which many posters have pointed is a non-issue away from the very busiest roads but quite a few consider is an issue, and as a motorist, these cyclist do cause traffic jams. Most roads present no problems for cyclists or drivers. Your outpouring again no outpouring, just proposals for dealing with a wide range of perceptions, including my own, that cyclists would be safer off-road, but more than welcome on-road by  most motorists. All i'm proposing is that they pay for that privilage based on occupancy..... is also very London-centric only this part, and in response to others on the forum who cycle to work in London - sorry, but i'm not dealing exclusively with your own particular concerns and as I don't go into town that often and certainly not in the ares you keep describing almost as war zones, I don't know. I could have a wild stab at an answer like you have Don, but yours have been a bit ridiculous I consider my proposals quite reasonable based on my knowledge of London, which seems to be better than yours, but let's see what the London Cyclist think  so I won't bother thanks.

You've completely and deliberately ignored the idea that govts use tax to drive behaviour er, no I haven't. I am merely proposing that this £2k pa tax would make cyclists think very carefully about their need to use the road system and to provide appropriate funding for investment in dedicated cycle infrastructure. If that's not driving behaviour as you put it, I don't know what is ! as well as to raise money, and you haven't once addressed how adding £2000 to the cost of cycling to work comes anywhere close [clue; it's not even on the same planet Don] to fitting in with the UK govt's policies on health, congestion, pollution, and the NHS. I made it clear that the £2k pa is a TAX - so many of you cyclists have made it clear in this thread and others that VED and Fuel Duty is not ring fenced for road infrastructure that I have made it clear that my proposed £2k pa goes into the general  fund. The gov decide whether to spend it on infrastructure, the NHS or whatever. You just gave in and said 'nice rant', which shows you have no clue. Apart from recognising your rants, I have provided more than adequate responses to each of your concerns.

Good trolling responses Don. I'll have a look in a bit to see how you've sidestepped assisted my understanding on this one. Keep it up.

Don Atkinson posted:

winkyincanada posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

Well, it happened again today ! Bloody mindless cyclists !!

Daughter No 3 was assaulted (not by a cyclist) and son-in-law unlawfully imprisoned (not by the police). Myself and Mrs D went up to Richmond (Surrey) and got things sorted out.

We decided on a walk along the Thames (to help them recover from their ordeal) from Ham House (you can park for free by the river) to Teddington Lock, then back along the path to Richmond for dinner and again back to Ham House to pick up the cars.

There were quite a few others strolling along the path and a fair number of cyclists too.

Now I didn’t do a headcount survey, but about half the cyclists we riding far too fast, dinging their bells and weaving between the pedestrians like motor cyclists in a traffic jam ! They certainly expected pedestrians to get out of their way ! Fortunately, this time we didn’t have any grandchildren with us ! They tend to run around, and it’s a bit like herding rabbits to keep them together !

Why ?, why the bloody rush ? most of these rushing cyclists were wearing earphones, some had loudspeakers, a few were on their mobile phones and one chap was doing wheelies. Their numbers varied from solo cyclists, pairs and packs of up to six.

What is it that drives these morons to do these things and thus give cyclists such a bad name ?

Well, it happened again today ! Bloody mindless motorists !!

I decided to cycle to work like I do nearly every day.

There were quite a few others cycling along along the road and a fair number of motorists too.

Now I didn’t do a headcount survey, but about half the motorists were driving far too fast, sounding their horns, revving their engines and squeezing past the cyclists like motor cyclists in a traffic jam ! They certainly expected cyclists to get out of their way ! Fortunately, this time we didn’t have any children with us ! They tend to cycle a little unpredictably, and it’s a bit like herding rabbits to keep them together !

Why ?, why the bloody rush ? Most of these rushing motorists were listening to music, some had loudspeakers, a few were on their mobile phones, and many were staring at their crotch (what's that about?)  but none were doing wheelies. Their numbers varied from solo motorists, pairs and packs of up to six.

What is it that drives these morons to do these things and thus give motorists such a bad name ?

Predictable, as always winky. You never let the side down and never apologise. Keep up the good work.

My reaction was: spot on! 

Jude2012 posted:

Shared paths are an issue. A cyclist should give some warning rather than rushing past, go pacestrians a chance to respond, as a matter of courtesy and avoiding a potential collision.

However, this assumes that the padestrian is not wearing headphones/has their dog(s) on a very long leash across the pathway/ or walking side by side with a prams/ on their mobile phone/ does not have control of their children - and of course has the sense to respnd when a cyclist rings their bell  or says something 'like 'on the right"

The worst thing I've encountered on a shared is a cyclist with headphone/mobile phone and a dog on a leash at the same time.

Second worse thing is a dog not on a lead.

Of course at the end of the day, iIt's a matter of perception whether thisse acts by pedestrians and cyclist are dangerous - annoying and concerning - for sure.  Unsafe ? 

The buggest killer and consumer of public resources are motorists.

What needs to be instilled in cyclists is that simply saying 'on the right' is terse and therefore rude and is unlikely to get a very favourable response from pedestrians, both because of its rudeness and because it is not actually very clear what the cyclist means (e.g move to the reight, or I'm coming past on the right) 'Excuse me please' or 'Could you move to the right, please' would be far more appropriate, more likely to get a prompt respose, and less likely to engender resentment - and of course it should be followed by 'thank you' as the cyclist passes. I actually find that if I say 'excuse me please', a majority of pedestrians actually apologise as they move to let me pass, even where they have clear right of way. 

I'm not sure what the equivalent is that needs to be instilled in car drivers...

Innocent Bystander posted:

Jude2012 posted:

Shared paths are an issue. A cyclist should give some warning rather than rushing past, go pacestrians a chance to respond, as a matter of courtesy and avoiding a potential collision.

However, this assumes that the padestrian is not wearing headphones/has their dog(s) on a very long leash across the pathway/ or walking side by side with a prams/ on their mobile phone/ does not have control of their children - and of course has the sense to respnd when a cyclist rings their bell  or says something 'like 'on the right"

The worst thing I've encountered on a shared is a cyclist with headphone/mobile phone and a dog on a leash at the same time.

Second worse thing is a dog not on a lead.

Of course at the end of the day, iIt's a matter of perception whether thisse acts by pedestrians and cyclist are dangerous - annoying and concerning - for sure.  Unsafe ? 

The buggest killer and consumer of public resources are motorists.

What needs to be instilled in cyclists is that simply saying 'on the right' is terse and therefore rude and is unlikely to get a very favourable response from pedestrians, both because of its rudeness and because it is not actually very clear what the cyclist means (e.g move to the reight, or I'm coming past on the right) 'Excuse me please' or 'Could you move to the right, please' would be far more appropriate, more likely to get a prompt respose, and less likely to engender resentment - and of course it should be followed by 'thank you' as the cyclist passes. I actually find that if I say 'excuse me please', a majority of pedestrians actually apologise as they move to let me pass, even where they have clear right of way. 

I'm not sure what the equivalent is that needs to be instilled in car drivers...

Totally agree.

Yesterday we walked along part of the Kennet & Avon between Bedwyn and Pewsey. Most of the cyclists slowed down and said "excuse me please". A few dickheads didn't (i've put that bit in (a) because it's true and (b) so that winky can do his usual transformation job )

One chap even dismounted on a particularly narrow section. I'll post a couple of pictures when I have time later on.

here's an interesting little article about some long forgotten cycle paths. It seems that with the huge growth in car ownership after the second world war, they were just left:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39847740

Nice link Tony.

That is exactly to sort of thing I had in mind when promoting dedicated cycle paths.

We used to have these running alongside the Great North Road (A1). The ones on what used to be The By-Pass around Chester-le-Street are still there. Cyclists could safely navigate around the town or commute to/from Durham City. No need to cycle into town and endanger pedestrians. Park the bike on the edge of town (like we do our cars) and walk the last few hundred yards to the office.

Yep !

Just looked on Google Earth and those cycle ways are plainly visible and it's blooming obvious what they are.

Wouldn't take much to modify the odd round-about to bring the cycle ways up to date.