Drunk cyclists with Santa hats escorted off M5 on Christmas Day

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

Quite, have cycled on some shocking single and dualled, singles that are twisty and tree/bush lined and also undulating and narrow yet are NSL. I'm what some would consider to be 'brave' or just crazy and I rode on the A1 north of Letchworth BITD on a few occasions and by comparison some roads are absolutely mental in terms of how unsighted and far more likely to be struck by motor vehicles. Hard shoulder of motorways IMHO are a far safer and less unpleasant prospect, not that I've done it but you know by design and how straight/good sight lines are that it's a far better prospective cycle route.

The rate of crashes for hard shoulders on motorways is high in the UK and elsewhere. Lots of drivers fall asleep at the wheel or lose control after a puncture. Because the crashes generally involve vehicles travelling at 60-70mph (or more) the impacts are often catastrophic. Hard shoulders are not safe, which is why drivers suffering breakdowns are advised by the police or groups like the AA and RAC to get out of their vehicles and stand behind a crash barrier. Cycling on a hard shoulder is nuts, plain and simple. I travel on the dual carriageway stretch of the A2 in London regularly where there is a 50mph speed limit and it does have hard shoulders. I do see some cyclists there, quite legally. They are nuts. The hard shoulder is not a safe place to be on a bicycle.

OldRidgeback wrote:

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

Quite, have cycled on some shocking single and dualled, singles that are twisty and tree/bush lined and also undulating and narrow yet are NSL. I'm what some would consider to be 'brave' or just crazy and I rode on the A1 north of Letchworth BITD on a few occasions and by comparison some roads are absolutely mental in terms of how unsighted and far more likely to be struck by motor vehicles. Hard shoulder of motorways IMHO are a far safer and less unpleasant prospect, not that I've done it but you know by design and how straight/good sight lines are that it's a far better prospective cycle route.

 

The rate of crashes for hard shoulders on motorways is high in the UK and elsewhere. Lots of drivers fall asleep at the wheel or lose control after a puncture. Because the crashes generally involve vehicles travelling at 60-70mph (or more) the impacts are often catastrophic. Hard shoulders are not safe, which is why drivers suffering breakdowns are advised by the police or groups like the AA and RAC to get out of their vehicles and stand behind a crash barrier. Cycling on a hard shoulder is nuts, plain and simple. I travel on the dual carriageway stretch of the A2 in London regularly where there is a 50mph speed limit and it does have hard shoulders. I do see some cyclists there, quite legally. They are nuts. The hard shoulder is not a safe place to be on a bicycle.

Except the police and government catergorically state that motorways are the safest stretches of roads in the UK. fewer than 100 annual deaths compared to 1,800 on all roads, 38 deaths on the hard shoulder between 2011-16.

403 hard shoulder incidents in FIVE years on the hard shoulder (2011-2016), 285 were incidents involving a stationary vehicle, exiting the hard shoulder numbered 55 (11 per year) so would not apply to people cycling on the hard shoulder, compare that to 5 million incidents EVERY year as a total.

Instead of your assumptions/beliefs, let's stick to facts shall we?

hirsute wrote:

Are you saying cyclists don't need to know highway code basics?

Are you saying that someone is saying cyclists don't need to know highway code basics?

Deeferdonk wrote:

hirsute wrote:

Are you saying cyclists don't need to know highway code basics?

Are you saying that someone is saying cyclists don't need to know highway code basics?

post 2 seemed to imply that.

hirsute wrote:

Deeferdonk wrote:

hirsute wrote:

Are you saying cyclists don't need to know highway code basics?

Are you saying that someone is saying cyclists don't need to know highway code basics?

post 2 seemed to imply that.

I think post #2 was pointing out the idiocy that one may legally ride on a dual carriageway, nay: is encouraged to do so, whilst being banned from riding on the hard shoulder of a motorway which is exactly the same except it has blue signs and a hard shoulder and is called "a motorway ".

brooksby wrote:

hirsute wrote:

Deeferdonk wrote:

hirsute wrote:

Are you saying cyclists don't need to know highway code basics?

Are you saying that someone is saying cyclists don't need to know highway code basics?

post 2 seemed to imply that.

I think post #2 was pointing out the idiocy that one may legally ride on a dual carriageway, nay: is encouraged to do so, whilst being banned from riding on the hard shoulder of a motorway which is exactly the same except it has blue signs and a hard shoulder and is called "a motorway ".

It's common to see JOGLER's or TTer riding the A30 section I still don't understand why they do it...especially given on a couple of occasions I've pulled in to the outside lane only to have a tit fly up behind me and try and squeeze the undertake only to see at the last minute why I was moving over.