"Utterly appalling": Cyclist takes National Cycle Network diversion... gives up after 40 very muddy metres; Cycling Santas complete Raleigh Chopper Everesting; Uijtdebroeks transfer saga finally over + more on the live blog

Why?
What is "Exploding Heads" and were you being ironic/ sarcastic or genuine?

Exploding heads do satrical sketches and one of the characters from it is colin from portsmouth. He's a sort of daily mail angry letter writer.

To be included in his list is a sort of badge of honour.

"My grandson's doing his Nativity play. They've made Jesus's mum a pregnant migrant woman crossing a border with her husband WHO ISN'T EVEN THE DAD.

The school's gone woke!"

"You said this last year, Colin."

"Which is proof that Sunak's migration policy is failing!"

British Values

https://twitter.com/Exploding_Heads/status/1735975036953981257

Well I'm sure there will be campaigners here cheering, and possibly petitioning for more arboreal-rodent-appropriate signage...

Well I suppose the old one did look more like it warned about potholes ahead, but I'm not expecting drivers to take any more notice of it.

plus I thought we were meant to be decluttering roads from signs that really aren't much use.

Rode from Plymouth to Gatwick, a few years ago.
Didn't really follow NCN2, but I tercepted it occasionally.
The ferries were a definite feature - even eschewed the road bridge at Teignmouth, just to ride the ferry.
Dartmouth, Teignmouth, Exmouth, Sandbanks, Mudeford, Lymington and Ryde.
Great trip, but haven't done any more due to pandemic, so need to get going again.

Can dig the GPX traces out, if you like

And these people do highway maintenance ...

When I first saw your post yesterday I read it as 40 miles, and then you finally got to an iffy bit.

How wrong I was.

The Ultimate Commuter is currently set up to tackle horsey bridleway and light forestry working mud.

The only thing so far to defeat them, (3inch Surly Dirt Wizards), has been full on forestry work filth. It's been my fault for failures in less, of course. But they will handle horsey bridleway mire where my feet have been in the ooze at the bottom of the pedal stroke. But this was a light brown forresty work quicksand where my front disk was in it. But they are ridiculously slow and draggy on tarmac.

I don't think Ive had to sing the kickstart/junior kicksteat theme (you dab, you sing) since fitting them early November. It has been quite wet this year. But mild, I would normally be washing the big winter gloves over the holidays, but I've not had to wear them yet, some of them take three days to dry.

Lol, if I'd managed 40 miles, then it wouldn't have been much of a story !

Someone sent me on a short cut before and it turned out to be quite muddy to the extent that it tooks 10 mins to clear out the mudguards with whatever small sticks I could find !

Also, I can't stress enough how much I dislike Sustrans and the NCN - I'm absolutely convinced they do much more harm than good, by allowing any old nonsense to be labelled as 'cycling infrastructure'. It means councils and government are able to claim to be doing something, even if it is basically unusable or useless.

the little onion wrote:

Also, I can't stress enough how much I dislike Sustrans and the NCN - I'm absolutely convinced they do much more harm than good, by allowing any old nonsense to be labelled as 'cycling infrastructure'. It means councils and government are able to claim to be doing something, even if it is basically unusable or useless.

Agreed, though there are some good Sustrans routes like the Bristol-Bath cycle path (was that their first?). Otherwise, they're like a parody of cycle infrastructure from more sensible countries.

Also, why do we have to rely on a charity for basic infrastructure when that's what taxes should pay for?

hawkinspeter wrote:

Agreed, though there are some good Sustrans routes like the Bristol-Bath cycle path (was that their first?).

Yes.  Back in the seventies/eighties, when they were a local campaigning organisation called Cyclebag, IIRC.

hawkinspeter wrote:

Also, why do we have to rely on a charity for basic infrastructure when that's what taxes should pay for?

UK standard - from social services to picking up the tab for broken soldiers.

OTOH we're still pretty "socialist" (even now) compared to, say, the US...

the little onion wrote:

Also, I can't stress enough how much I dislike Sustrans and the NCN - I'm absolutely convinced they do much more harm than good, by allowing any old nonsense to be labelled as 'cycling infrastructure'. It means councils and government are able to claim to be doing something, even if it is basically unusable or useless.

Yes, but there is a "but"...

That was my view of the organisation, back when. Some great volunteer folks but basically an almost parasitic organisation hungry to get to positions of influence. Creators of the national sign (-off on whatever rubbish to garner credit and cosy up to local authorities) network.

However... not sure what they've "done" recently* but there has been a sea change in the comms coming out in recent years. Including some (almost) self-criticism eg. re-appraising the"network" (albeit for accessibility). They now seem to have sensible statements of what actually constitutes good cycling infra. Plus they distinguish between cycling and walking, "recreational" and everyday usable infra.

* Given that it's a very small charity this is mostly "organising other people to do stuff that they or a local authority will pay for".

Also - looking back I can sometimes summon up a sympathetic view: this was done in the climate of "encouraging cycling"* (that has essentially existed my whole life). Lots of the time "cycling" was actually a dirty word. Presumably part of the reason why "Sustrans" and not putting the cycling part front and centre - because politically that was a red flag?

With some exceptions (eg. "National Cycling Strategy" more than 25 years ago**) mostly nobody was paying for this at all. And when they did only at "paint and sign" level.

Have they made a positive difference? That's definitely debatable. I guess I can see this (in a less critical mood) as a strategy of trying to get inside the official tents and work with those in power from there. To keep non-motorised transport on the agenda. How else do you make change happen nationally?

Of course (as I have) you can view another way...

* With a few warm words, and by building infra for motor vehicles, some of which could theoretically be used by cyclists.

** https://www.cyclinguk.org/blog/national-cycling-strategys-25th-anniversa...

I remember being baffled going down Cycle Route 5 from South of Birmingham to Oxford. It is a really useful route, indeed nearly every time I go out on my bike I seem to stumble across it - rather like any time you go walking in the West Midlands it is compulsory to walk on a section of the Heart of England Way.

However, somewhere down by Banbury, when I plotted a ride for a group of us, about 15 years ago, I decided not to follow the map as it looked to me like it went down a footpath rather than a country lane. When we rode it, indeed the signed NCR passed through a gate and a footpath which was pasture, not even a proper path, yet, 20 metres further along was a right turn down a pleasant country lane. I could not fathom why that was. I wrote to Sustrans at the time, but puzzled me that someone should have had the mindset that mud trumped tarmac.

Had to contend with this yesterday. No way I could have got through under that bridge, it looked to be quite deep. There were some steps that I could carry the bike up and round though, so not too bad. I did ride through the one at the bottom, about a foot deep, but why didn't they fill in that slight dip when they built the path?