Group ride. Wet February day. Mud. And we’re not even in Belgium.
Mud
Mon, Feb 16, 2009 11:07
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
1 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
More Opinion
Latest Comments
chrisonabike 9 minutes ago
For those interested in the "how we could do this (better)" there's the Bicycle Dutch article and video as OnYerBike notes, and also: Bicycle Dutch also has "Riding around the bus stop" specifically on that topic in NL. For the UK context (including the accessibility issue): Ranty Highwayman has written several times on this ("Floating Bus Stops: Redux" and "Floating Bus Stops") - along other things pointing out that we have *effectively* had some of these for a long time without anyone shouting about them! Robert Weetman also has an article on this (mainly looking at the less polished Copenhagen design): "Copenhagen bus stops"
half_wheel79 28 minutes ago
Whilst I appreciate the idea behind Lime bikes/scooters and their ilk, the problem lies in that they can just be abandoned anywhere. If they required returning to a dedicated docking station before the ride was considered finished then that would cut down on this nonsense. Or even go a step further, it wont release your phone until its placed back in the docking station.
chrisonabike 33 minutes ago
The Restore of lobby groups... TBF they pulled off a coup some time back with drumming up opposition around bus stop bypasses, but they have a ... particular view on this which speaks more to "concerns" (and not of everyone) than facts and stats. While the language is extreme, at this point (see campaign above) people are concerned so carefully "addressing concerns" (rather than dismissing) is important. But doing that the popular way and just blocking measures which are statistically safe won't move us forward. Particularly while effectively ignoring the motoring elephants in the town - for which buses and bikes are part of the solution.
mctrials23 47 minutes ago
@ROOTminus1 I would argue that yes you can. You can unless you are paying zero attention to anything but the person ahead of you. For almost the entire video even if the persons bum you've decided to sit on is blocking your direct view ahead, you can see it on the other side of the lane. You should always be checking your surroundings on any mode of transport for hazards.
ROOTminus1 52 minutes ago
@mctrials23 Can you see the lines when it's that busy though? That's what the flashing beacons at a zebra crossing are for, as would a rumble-strip texture approximately 4m either side of the crossing give adequate alternative indication that there is a potential hazard ahead, with suitable braking distances. I'm not saying everyone on 2 wheels is a saint and innocent in that clip, far from it, but the design of the infra does encourage problematic behaviour. Just as most road infra fails to protect cyclists from drivers by not setting the expectation of the presence of cyclists, this fails to protect pedestrians by funnelling them to a crossing with the bare minimum of encouragement for cyclists to be prepared for pedestrians at that point. Most importantly though, none of this discussion excuses the choice of inflammatory language by Baroness Ludford.
chrisonabike 54 minutes ago
Shocked not shocked about the first part (although it may be that in places the (by)law is such that they don't have to...) I believe some LAs have said that they can't stop the firms (Oxford IIRC), so the second is hopeful. Of course as others note "if only this happened with cars" - quite right. But that doesn't mean we should therefore tolerate other commercial interests grabbing public space for private profit.
mitsky 1 hour ago
Will the authorities of Penge do the same for drivers parking badly thus causing the same problem for disabled people? I won't hold my breath.
kingleo 2 hours ago
Two car crashes, 12 motorists killed ..... but hey, cyclists are the big danger on our roads.
Mr Blackbird 2 hours ago
As an aside, Baroness Ludford's dramatic sensationalist language is perhaps an illustration of why many of our politicians are so useless. So much easier to utter eye-catching statements and headline grabbing soundbites, rather than quietly working, getting things done and making a positive difference.
OnYerBike 2 hours ago
Given there is a marked crossing there, I do think the cyclists should be stopping. That said, there is a reasonable argument that the marked crossing is not necessary. Bicycle Dutch has a good post on the subject (I'm not going to post a link as otherwise this comment may never see the light of day, but just google 'Bicycle Dutch How hard is it to cross the cycle path'). In essence, forcing cyclists to stop wastes a lot of energy compared to a pedestrian stopping, and it's generally not hard for a pedestrian to find a suitable gap in which to cross. So not having a marked crossing, and simply expecting pedestrians to cross when it's sensible to do so, normally works pretty well and keeps everyone moving better. That aligns with what we see in the video - in all cases, it is only a matter of seconds before the pedestrians are able to cross despite cyclists not stopping. If the pedestrians weren't expecting cyclists to stop (because there was no marked crossing) then the pedestrians would not feel endangered.
1 thought on “Mud”
heh
you need to nuffle those colours a bit, you’ll probably get into next year’s rouleur annual 🙂