Halfords offer free bike to Twitter user who bought stolen bike and traced owner; Cyclist who claimed to have been robbed made it up say police; Gone in 60 seconds – 3T Exploro stolen from garage; Cycling vlogger Durianrider attacked + more on live blog

Xenophon2 wrote:

I'm donning my asbestos suit but she with the horse is imo right about one thing although I understand it's not possible under current uk legislation:  where a cycle path exists its use should be made compulsory.  My argument is not about 'slowing down traffic' but about separating two totally different streams of road users.

This is the case here in Belgium* (where a lot more people cycle than in the UK) and imo it makes a lot of sense.

*With one proviso:  use of a cycling path is compulsory if it can be safely ridden.  E.g. in winter if the cycle path is not salted a cyclist may use the road.  Or if there so many potholes that it becomes dangerous.

We've got a fair number of cycle lanes that although rideable, end up dumping you into traffic in dangerous places or that involve then crossing multiple lanes of traffic to carry on your journey. There's also the issue of needing to slow down or stop at all the side roads as a lot of our cycle lanes don't have priority over traffic. It's just a lot more practical and safer to use the roads if you wish to travel at any speed.

Xenophon2 wrote:

*With one proviso:  use of a cycling path is compulsory if it can be safely ridden.  E.g. in winter if the cycle path is not salted a cyclist may use the road.  Or if there so many potholes that it becomes dangerous.

Or it's got cars parked in it. Or it's got grit on it from the resurfacing six months ago which makes it a skid risk. Or it weaves around like a squirrel on crack. Or it's covered in paint which turns it into an ice rink a the the first hint of rain.

I think between us we just ruled out an awful lot of bike lanes.

Xenophon2 wrote:

I'm donning my asbestos suit but she with the horse is imo right about one thing although I understand it's not possible under current uk legislation:  where a cycle path exists its use should be made compulsory.  My argument is not about 'slowing down traffic' but about separating two totally different streams of road users.

This is the case here in Belgium* (where a lot more people cycle than in the UK) and imo it makes a lot of sense.

*With one proviso:  use of a cycling path is compulsory if it can be safely ridden.  E.g. in winter if the cycle path is not salted a cyclist may use the road.  Or if there so many potholes that it becomes dangerous.

Not sure if you have visited the UK, but most of our cycle paths are atrocious and pointless. Nothing like the infrastructure on the continent.

I give you two examples of poorly designed, badly constructed paths from my nearest town, Kingston upon Thames.

We have a newly constructed cycle path over Kingston Hill. The path constantly switches between segregated lane and shared pavement with pinch points as it passes through bus stops.

We have another bike path along a road out of town past the University. It's less than 3 months old but it has been so poorly constructed that it floods and, surprise surprise is already breaking up, strewing gravel across path and road.

Our roads are bad enough, but the cycle paths are something else!

Xenophon2 wrote:

This is the case here in Belgium* (where a lot more people cycle than in the UK) and imo it makes a lot of sense.

I've ridden in Belgium twice and while their were some nice bike paths on the whole I didn't like it. A lot of the paths I used were no good for cyclists traveling at speed, weaving around road funiture, placed in the dooring zone of parked cars (appreciate europeans are supposedly better at checking their blind spots but it only takes one muppet), and constantly having to slow to cross at side roads and junctions. While you are offered some protection it feels like the cost is a more cumbersome journey.

If you want people to use cycle lanes and cycle in general, it has to be because it is more attractive than getting in the car. The only place I have seen that is getting it right is the Netherlands. IF you can provide cycle lanes that make using them more direct with better priority than using the road, then by all means but if you can't ban using the road with anything less while claiming your trying to increase cycling numbers.

As for the dumb woman claiming that cyclists cause polution that is the same as saying a the victim of a shooting is somehow responsible for being in the way of the bullet. NO. If you bring the gas guzzling metal devil to the party then that was your decision and the cyclist would prefer you weren't there at all.

Xenophon2 wrote:

*With one proviso:  use of a cycling path is compulsory if it can be safely ridden. 

So that's 99% of British cycle paths covered by that proviso then.

Xenophon2 wrote:

I'm donning my asbestos suit ... where a cycle path exists its use should be made compulsory ... use of a cycling path is compulsory if it can be safely ridden

No need for the suit, some of us are capable of politely disagreeing.

The problem with this in the UK is that most cycle paths are not fit for purpose, especially for riders who like to make progress. Unfortunately, the decision as to whether the cycle path is safe or not won't fall to the person who has to use it; it will be decided by either a judge or police officer (or possibly some jobsworth from a private enforcement company) and will therefore be used to fine with impunity those of us who'd much rather mix with the traffic than the pedestrians, dogs, rubbish bags, parked cars, broken glass, drain covers, piled-up snow (the list goes on) usually found in a typical UK bike lane.

I'd like to add another acronym to SMIDSY and MGIF and that's "GITFuCyL" - "get in the fucking cycle lane". Regularly shouted at me by drivers who seem to think that I'm only in the road to annoy them. If there were some great, usable, segregated infrastructure, of course we'd all use it. But there isn't, which is why I'll continue to ride on the road even when I have the option of being protected from the motor traffic by a line of paint.

Xenophon2 wrote:

I'm donning my asbestos suit but she with the horse is imo right about one thing although I understand it's not possible under current uk legislation:  where a cycle path exists its use should be made compulsory.  My argument is not about 'slowing down traffic' but about separating two totally different streams of road users.

This is the case here in Belgium* (where a lot more people cycle than in the UK) and imo it makes a lot of sense.

*With one proviso:  use of a cycling path is compulsory if it can be safely ridden.  E.g. in winter if the cycle path is not salted a cyclist may use the road.  Or if there so many potholes that it becomes dangerous.

Or they are covered in glass or leaf mould as is the case here in Swindon - wrote to the local council and Councillor responsible and they said it would be cleared the next day... still hasn't happened as tomorrow never comes (at least in Swindon). I have also come off my bike on cycle paths in Chippenham which have lamp posts in the middle of them and glass thrown up from the road. We cycle on the road as those are occasionally cleaned - cycle paths in Swindon and Wiltshire (where Melksham is) aren't. 

Cupov wrote:

That guy who had the 3T exploro nicked must be well connected as “police arrived in minutes and a helicopter was deployed to search for the culprit”

My thoughts exactly. Since when do Police give a flying f*&k about a stolen bike, especially to the point of getting a helicopter out to search for it. Either well connected or total bullshit

zero_trooper wrote:

"I have to muck out my stables…"

Lyn and her First World problems 

i don't see why that stops her cycling though.  Does she shovel the shit into her car boot so she can then recycle it into a word vomit to send to the local paper?  And racing and time trialling which at the fastest for a  would be 25-30 mph averaging which is well within most roads speed limits. Surely she should be happy they are racing as it means she is held up less. 

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

zero_trooper wrote:

"I have to muck out my stables…"

Lyn and her First World problems 

i don't see why that stops her cycling though.  Does she shovel the shit into her car boot so she can then recycle it into a word vomit to send to the local paper? 

Apparently there is some kind of fetish about rolling around in it with the stable maids.  Or stallions.  Or something.  Silly mare.

zero_trooper wrote:

"I have to muck out my stables…"

Lyn and her First World problems 

You'd hope roadcc would acknowledge their sources

https://road.cc/content/forum/270407-do-not-read

alexuk wrote:

That crash was totally from slipping on white paint.

Avoid the white paint when its wet/icy! 

White paint on the road is supposed to conform to some sort of friction regulations, and if you slip on it when it's wet, then it probably doesn't meet them.

eburtthebike wrote:

alexuk wrote:

That crash was totally from slipping on white paint.

Avoid the white paint when its wet/icy! 

White paint on the road is supposed to conform to some sort of friction regulations, and if you slip on it when it's wet, then it probably doesn't meet them.

I am not aware of any regulations but I know that the white paint used in the UK is slippy in the wet. Treat it the same as overbanding and inspection covers.

On Manx roads they use a grippier type of white paint for the benefit of the TT racers. I don't know just how much better it would be if you cross it with the throttle open and your knee down at 140mph in the wet.

Simon E wrote:

I am not aware of any regulations but I know that the white paint used in the UK is slippy in the wet. Treat it the same as overbanding and inspection covers.

Class S3 (not less than 55 SRT) skid resistance to Table 7 of BS EN 1436.

ie, mix 10-15% sand in the thermoplastic.

Simon E wrote:

eburtthebike wrote:

alexuk wrote:

That crash was totally from slipping on white paint.

Avoid the white paint when its wet/icy! 

White paint on the road is supposed to conform to some sort of friction regulations, and if you slip on it when it's wet, then it probably doesn't meet them.

I am not aware of any regulations but I know that the white paint used in the UK is slippy in the wet. Treat it the same as overbanding and inspection covers.

On Manx roads they use a grippier type of white paint for the benefit of the TT racers. I don't know just how much better it would be if you cross it with the throttle open and your knee down at 140mph in the wet.

There is a standard, BS EN 1436:2018, but you have to buy it!  https://shop.bsigroup.com/en/ProductDetail/?pid=000000000030373461

gibbon wrote:

Durian is a fruit.

Is it the one that smells like rotting corpses? Or am I thinking of another one?

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

gibbon wrote:

Durian is a fruit.

Is it the one that smells like rotting corpses? Or am I thinking of another one?

The smell has also been described as a mix of sulphur, sewage, fruit, honey and roasted and rotting onions.

The taste is very bizarre - I found it to be right on the edge of very delicious and very disgusting. I just couldn't figure out if I liked it or not.

Bonus fact: squirrels are able to pick out the best durians using just their sense of smell.