“Is one minute of your time worth someone’s life?” Zero cyclists injured since new bike lane installed – while driving times barely change; Cyclist blasted for “too bright” lights… and no hi-vis; Is a muddy Roubaix on the way? + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
“Is this a picture of the old badly-designed, dangerous roads?” Department for Transport road safety graphic blasted for “representing bad practice”
We’re ramping up our efforts to boost road safety, targeting 27 of the country’s most dangerous roads with a further £47.5 million in funding. pic.twitter.com/UsFZarKA7A
— Department for Transport (@transportgovuk) April 6, 2023
The poor graphic designers at the Department for Transport will have a sleepless Easter break, after a graphic published alongside the DfT’s latest road safety announcement, has been widely panned on social media.
This morning, the DfT announced that it is committing £47.5 million to target 27 of England’s “most dangerous roads”. The scheme aims to enhance road safety measures on these high-risk roads by improving signage and road markings, and re-designing junctions.
However, the graphic accompanying the announcement – which features cyclists, pedestrians, and motorists navigating a road seemingly under construction – could have done with its own redesign, after several Twitter users noted that the road layout is not quite up to the DfT’s own standards:
This picture represents bad practice.
You’ve got a belisha beacon on a none standard crossing, that’s not on the desire line
The traffic management for the road works looks unsafe
The diversion sign should be yellow
Is the cycle lane 2way? It should retain priority
skiers?— Cyclops Dave (@davelostdave) April 6, 2023
Where’s the ‘safety’ for people #cycling w flow ax the side roads? Why isn’t the #ped crossing on the desire line? @RantyHighwayman @WeAreCyclingUK @activetraveleng
— Ruth Mayorcas (@RuthMayorcas) April 6, 2023
I know the idea of the graphic is for clarity… but jeez… none of this is correct DfT 🤦♂️
— benlarderwashere (@nebredral) April 6, 2023
Is this a picture of the old badly-designed dangerous roads? Why put a zebra crossing set back from the junction when pedestrians have priority crossing the side road in a straight line? Why is the cycle lane not continuous?
— #99 (@HateToHate) April 6, 2023
It’s just a shame that the illustration on the cover breaks just about all the design principles laid out in LTN1/20 S10.
Forcing cyclist going ahead to yield to all traffic going in or out of side roads.Perhaps that’s the before improvement picture? We can hope.
— Sean Foster 💉💉💉💉 (@Bishop0151) April 6, 2023
Or maybe the DfT is just being clever, and showing us how desperate the situation on our roads has become? Maybe…
Meanwhile, road safety supremo Mark Hodson was on hand to note the biggest threat on our roads:
No such thing as a “dangerous road”…. It’s the people using them that are the issue… https://t.co/YsUJh26yqs
— Mark Hodson (@markandcharlie) April 6, 2023
MailOnline takes aim at cyclists for not using “rollercoaster” bike lane... that is “littered with stones” and “stops and starts all the way along”
UCI wants to ban Scottish mountain biker… because he’s sponsored by OnlyFans
Slow riding on cobbled climbs, sock height, sponsorships by adult subscription services… Is there anything the UCI won’t clamp down upon?
Hein and Pat, quiet at the back…
In the governing body’s latest quest to protect its glistening reputation (Hi, it’s Travis Tygart on the line), the UCI have sent a letter to Scottish pro mountain biker Lewis Buchanan, warning him that he won’t be able to take part in any of their races unless he drops his new sponsor, OnlyFans.
According to Innerleithen-born enduro rider Buchanan, the UCI told him that his deal with the subscription service (don’t pretend you’ve never heard of it) violates article 1.1.089 of their regulations, which states that:
Without prejudice of the applicable law, no brand of tobacco, spirits, pornographic products, or any other products that might damage the image of the UCI or the sport of cycling in general shall be associated directly or indirectly with a licence–holder, a UCI team or a national or international cycling competition.
Hmmm… the UCI were awful quiet about image-damaging sponsors when they let Ineos (petro-chemical fracking enthusiasts), Amgen (EPO manufacturers), and a host of oil states with dodgy human rights records walk brazenly through the front door of their HQ in Aigle.
> Cycling’s most controversial sponsors
And speaking of the kind of thing OnlyFans subscribers enjoy, the UCI also seemed nonplussed about erotic website EasyToys sponsoring what was previously known as the Healthy Ageing Tour, complete with, ahem, interesting prizes for the winners of each state…
Prizes in women’s cycling are improving 😅. You can leave tips on how to use it in the comments😂 pic.twitter.com/Fh23MVG4vv
— Ellen van Dijk (@ellenvdijk) March 3, 2022
“As much as I’ve had criticism for my deal with OnlyFans for whatever reason, the positivity and understanding my supporters and fans have had has outweighed all that and it’s really allowing me to live a mint life, create more connections that can lead to life after riding and travel more and do more of what I love, which is riding and racing bikes,” Buchanan wrote on Instagram this week.
“The UCI are not really interested in learning more or being educated on it… so shame there. I wonder if OnlyFans came along and dumped a ton of cash and wanted to help the sport in a way, if that opinion/rule would be slid away a tad.”
Nail. Head.
‘Pog did what at Flanders? Hold my beer’: Jonas Vingegaard grabs second stage win in a row with long-range Basque Country attack
#Vingegaard is not an explosive rider so when @EFprocycling attacked, he made the smart move to counter-attack at his own space and he even did great in a sprint! Smart racing from @JumboVismaRoad & the Dane.
It is great to see @MikelLandaMeana in such great form. #Itzulia2023 pic.twitter.com/cTHmKADupG— Aniko Kapornaki (@kapornaki_bike) April 6, 2023
He may be following the more traditional approach to the Tour de France compared to his cannibalistic rival Tadej Pogačar, but reigning Tour champ Jonas Vingegaard is proving that his form is just as on point, securing his second stage win in a row at the Tour of the Basque Country this afternoon.
Vingegaard even took a leaf out of the Pog playbook, attacking alongside Mikel Landa with 20km to go, before practically dragging the Spaniard to the line and then beating him in the sprint, all while holding off a small group of chasers behind.
4️⃣ STAGE IS FOR @j_vingegaard 🤝 @JumboVismaRoad
🏆 GP @BancoSabadell #Itzulia2023 pic.twitter.com/RWCzZN7OmU
— Itzulia Basque Country (@ehitzulia) April 6, 2023
Roll on July…
The “Poundland Jeremy Vine” strikes again!
A classic (and thoroughly terrifying) case of phone driving here – did she even look up once? – which ensured the distracted, and obviously very popular, motorist picked up six points and a £200 fine…
What caused this tight squeeze?
What went wrong?
You decide.#MM71XWLAm I just a Poundland @theJeremyVine? Yes I am! pic.twitter.com/buuQOxFF8g
— ThatGuyOnTheBike (@TGonthebike) April 6, 2023
That’s the interesting thing with phone use to my mind. It’s easy to prosecute and comes with 6 points, so the police will always go for that.
— ThatGuyOnTheBike (@TGonthebike) April 6, 2023
… While also spawning a new nickname for Twitter user ThatGuyOnTheBike: the ‘Poundland Jeremy Vine’.
Turns out the OG Jezza Vine approves:
Like this!
— Jeremy Vine (@theJeremyVine) April 6, 2023
Reader reaction: Time saving vs a cyclist’s life – what would you prioritise?
“Is one minute of your time worth someone’s life?” was the universal question posed by an American cyclist, after motorists in Maryland continued to oppose a new protected cycle lane because it added time to their commutes, despite a recently published state report noting that the cycle lane’s effect on drivers’ travel times was negligible.
So, is someone’s life worth the same as one minute of your time?
“I think the problem is that a lot of people might answer that with a loud ‘YES’,” road.cc reader brooksby noted in today’s comments section.
Benthic agreed, writing: “That’s quite a different question to, ‘Is one minute of your time worth a cyclist’s life?’, in the mind of your average motorist.”
“Given the multiple daily examples many of us can cite where a driver has put either our own or other road users lives in danger, often just to save mere seconds, it feels a rhetorical question to pose,” says Awavey.
“Or indeed to save no seconds at all,” agrees Rendel, “given the substantial number of London drivers I experience every day making dubious overtakes and close passes in order to get to the red light that’s clearly visible up ahead a bit more quickly.”
“But it’s a minute EVERY DAY!…” pondered ktache. Sarcastically, of course…
“Is one minute of your time worth someone’s life?” Report says zero cyclists have been involved in collisions since protected bike lane was added – while travel times for motorists have barely changed
We’re kicking things off on our pre-Easter live blog with a trip across the Atlantic, where a report on a new segregated bike lane in the Mid-Atlantic state of Maryland – which was, surprise, surprise, vehemently opposed by some local motorists – has shown that no cyclists or pedestrians were involved in collisions in the six months since the protected infrastructure was installed.
In comparison, in the nine months before the bike lane was put in place, six pedestrians and cyclists were injured in collisions involving vehicles, while one cyclist was killed after being struck by a driver.
According to MoCo360, last year over 8,000 people signed a petition opposing the installation of a protected bike lane and high visibility pedestrian crossings on the Old Georgetown Road in North Bethesda.
Biking Old Georgetown Road with @WABADC, @MoCoFSS & @actfortransit in support of Bethesda safety improvements and protected bike lanes. Great turnout – 100 plus! pic.twitter.com/yXkM3G7FhD
— Seth Grimes (@Seth4MC) January 8, 2023
The opposition to changes on the road, where 18-year-old cyclist Enzo Marcel Alvarenga was killed in a collision involving a motorist last June, were based on – as these things often are – concerns that the changes would extend the commuting time of drivers and confuse them.
So, what about the poor motorists? To what extent have they been affected by a new road layout which has so far succeeded in keeping the most vulnerable road users from being injured or killed?
Well, they’ve been delayed by a whole 30 seconds, even a minute, in one direction, at certain times of the day.
According to a report released by the Maryland State Highway Administration earlier this week, travel times for motorists heading northbound in the morning has increased by seven percent, or half a minute, since the bike lane was installed, while in the afternoon those travelling in the same direction face a stifling minute-long delay.
Heading southbound, travel times have barely been affected at all, and are currently sitting around pre-bike lane levels.
While local state delegate Marc Korman said that the whole thing was about “finding the right balance” (between road safety and motorists’ impatience, apparently), several cyclists on Twitter praised the report as evidence that “protected bike lanes are working”:
Over a 10-month period in 2022 there were 40 crashes on Old Georgetown Road. Since the bike lane installation, travel times have gone up by *one minute* at most, and there have been no crashes. Is one minute of your time worth someone’s life? https://t.co/tadGRSHgD7
— Jane Lyons-Raeder (@janelyonsraeder) April 5, 2023
0 crashes from Oct. 22 to March 23 involving pedestrians or bikers is an amazing stat, compared to six-including a fatal one that took the life of an 18 year old from Jan to Oct. 22. Protected bike lanes are working.
— AJ Metcalf (@AJwatchMD) April 5, 2023
Also stoked to hear that incidents of injury collisions on Old Georgetown Road have decreased since their installation and no pedestrians or cyclists have been involved. Oh, and vehicle travel times are 30-60 seconds longer, tops. Yay for improved infrastructure!!
— Carly Tu (@carly_tu) April 4, 2023
Of course, some angry motorists still aren’t impressed, kicking off a few debates:
It is going to be pure hell in September.
— The Original Red Snapper (@httrredskin) April 4, 2023
It’s going to save lives when the high school opens.
— mrzaius 🚸 🚲 🐘 (@MrZaius) April 4, 2023
Why do democrats insist we become a third world country? If this is your solution to alleviating traffic you need psychological help
— Steven (@MaVASteve) April 5, 2023
This is the type of safety solution used with great success in Germany, Holland, Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland, Norway, Austria. The most advanced countries in the world.
Third-world countries are more like the US in the 1960s, few bike lanes and bad overall on traffic safety.— Urban Upgrade (@ForwardBike) April 6, 2023
Well, it’s nice to know that these arguments happen all over the world, eh?
Happy Easter everyone! Now, time for a weekend in Hell
😈 👀 Coup d’oeil sur ce qui a fait la légende de #ParisRoubaix en ce week-end d’Enfer du Nord : pic.twitter.com/p7KobCokPM
— Paris-Roubaix (@parisroubaix) April 6, 2023
That’s it for the live blog this week. I hope you all have a wonderful – and mud-filled – Paris-Roubaix weekend…
6 April 2023, 08:55
Sing, Michael, sing…
Rudie Can’t Steer? TfL double-decker bus crashes into London bike shop with driver injured
Route 19 bus bizarrely driven into a bike shop in London, bus driver injured
6 April 2023, 08:55
The Women’s Tour, the future of British cycling, and a wet and windy on-bike interview all feature in the latest episode of the road.cc Podcast
How do we save UK bike racing? SweetSpot's PR Director on Women's Tour cancellation and staying positive for the future
In this episode of the road.cc Podcast, Ryan talks to Peter Hodges about the state of UK bike racing, and Dave joins a mental health campaigner for a few miles of a 2000 mile bike ride across the UK
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.
76 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
The covid / post-covid boom is driven primarily by failures of capitalist strategy, causing over supply and price gouging. What we are seeing now is the correction. Most so-called ‘Western brands’ bikes are made in Eastern countries anyway - who have long been the leading manufacturers of carbon bikes. Now these makers are becoming brands / sellers too and Western brands have been put on notice. Inflation is driven by greed, not need.
@Benthic A125 motorbike can be ridden by a 17 year old can do about 75MPH; a legal e-bike that a 17-year-old cannot use can do about 15MPH.
The latest moral panic. "From August, the legal age to ride an e-scooter in Ireland will rise from 16 to 18" But, in Ireland you can still drive a: - moped from the age of 16 - 125 cc motorbike from the age of 17 - 3.5 tonne car from the age of 17 So that makes complete sense.
@mitsky I am seeing those Amazon ones in Manchester pretty much every day.
Quite. There's also a demand side story to accompany your eloquently written post, in that domestic demand has dampened from the captive COVID market of a few years back, and less international demand due to tariff-led policies and anti-dumping laws. On Chinese competition, I don't think it's necessarily Western profit-seeking behaviour which has caused increased Chinese supply and competitiveness as much as higher Chinese investment leading to higher quality output, innovation, and economies of scale. I don't know about Chinese frames as I haven't bought one and haven't seen one, but for wheels I don't see any inherent quality advantage for Western brands. Indeed, innovation seems to be coming from Chinese brands along with lower prices, just like we're seeing with electric cars. So higher quality and lower prices.
They should concentrate on the road users who do most of the killing and injuring: car drivers.
I've used the "why aren't you on the motorway?" one before, except here it would be "highway" or "Interstate." The other one I like is: "Get on the sidewalk!" (pavement) "On the side what?" "On the sidewalk!" "So it's not called a side-bicycle then?" Also one I've used a couple of times: "You're not a car!" "Neither are you!"
I've used Challenge, Vittoria, Veloflex and Continental tyres. What stands out for me regarding Challenge is how robust their supple tyres are. Usually there is a tradeoff there, but Challenge somehow manages to keep both.
Well, many of them are more correctly "emit elsewhere". However as we do successfully move away from "coal, oil, and latterly gas and wood" the fraction that is actually emitted does go down. So overall, welcome. (It's complicated... the renewables business is just business like any other so we aren't keen to discuss all the resources being used / new places that get trashed. Example being how much steel (mostly still "dirty") and concrete we need for the new infra. And of course where humans can, they will, as much as they can afford, so Jevons Paradox applies).
RE: Royal Mail 4-wheeled "bikes" - hadn't they been trying to ditch the bikes for ages (like society overall)? When they did they dumped them in favour of vans plus those trolleys. Overall if this means it ends up more "micro-van" rather than "walking plus full size vans" I guess a degree of pedalling is an improvement? When Royal Mail and parking came up before someone said they can ditch their vehicles where they want (if they have to/within reason... but nobody's going to do anything about it). The real issue is all the other commercial deliverers do that anyway. Plus most of the rest of the population...
76 thoughts on ““Is one minute of your time worth someone’s life?” Zero cyclists injured since new bike lane installed – while driving times barely change; Cyclist blasted for “too bright” lights… and no hi-vis; Is a muddy Roubaix on the way? + more on the live blog”
Quote:
I think the problem is that a lot of people might answer that with a loud “YES”.
Sadly, local news suggests a
Sadly, local news suggests a few seconds rather than a minute.
https://www.ilkleygazette.co.uk/news/23434971.police-appeal-witnesses-cyclist-killed-near-ilkley/
Very sad. Condolences to the victim’s family.
But it’s a minute EVERY DAY!.
But it’s a minute EVERY DAY!…
brooksby wrote:
As long as it isn’t their own.
People’s comments about hi
People’s comments about hi-vis being too bright are ridiculous.
Comments about lights being too bright may be fair. The trouble is, UK government sets no standards about dipped beams. Many lights throw light all over the place. I use a Ravemen 1200, which is nice and bright, but doesn’t dazzle everyone I approach.
We could learn a lot from Germany when it comes to standards for bike lights. In the meantime, buy a Ravemen or similar.
Bike lights can dazzle and it
Bike lights can dazzle and it’s one of my pet peeves that some cyclists don’t get you shouldnt point thousands of lumens of light at the person’s eyes who is driving the big heavy metal object towards you, because they can’t see you properly anymore.
But it comes from that circular reasoning of near misses, they didn’t see me, therefore I need brighter lights to be seen and round it goes.
Awavey wrote:
I point the my lights at the road in front of me, where I am riding, not towards the opposite lane parallel to the ground which would not help much
You may well do but the
You may well do but the spread of the beam can still affect others – see lesterama comment on German standard lights.
Awavey wrote:
fairs fair, they don’t dip their lights for cyclists
UNTIL I put mine on to full beam for a few seconds.
Decades of being ignored and
Decades of being ignored and blinded by drivers failing to dip whilst using my fully legal Wonders, Ever Readys and Spesh’s 2.5s, then I got my Night Sun TriLight, with overdriven 20W spot and remote control…
lesterama wrote:
I run a B&M 100Lux (not lumens) light which has a great German cut off on the light, doesn’t dazzle. This works for me for a 20mile commute of 10 miles dark B-roads and 10miles city. I also use a 200lumen to fill in closer to me for the “imperfections” in our roqds I need to avoid..
It is a stupid argument
It is a stupid argument though. How many cars headlights are too bright? Driving, cycling, running, walking, I am constantly blinded by beefy car headlights.
Drivists already think they
Drivists already think they have reason enough to hate us. Let’s not carry on their displays of poor etiquette and give them another.
I find most light problems
I find most light problems are with cars with one mis-aligned beam. The cyclist equivalent being a poorly positioned front light (before we even get to light spill).
Andrewbanshee wrote:
It’s true, but motorists don’t really get much choice about the headlights their vehicle comes with – with LED lights, it isn’t even possible* to change them for something less bright or less white – all you can do is adjust the beam angle or turn them off**
Another issue with car lights being LED is that they lose about 30% of their brighness as they age, so in order for them to be bright enough when they age, they need to be extra bright to begin with.
But yes, whilst I think it is good not to blind people, if I’m riding on a road at night and it is a choice of potentially not being seen or potentially blinding them, I’m going to go with the choice of blinding them. If I’m on a dark cycle path and don’t need to worry about competing with vehicles with blinding lights, I’ll dip my light down so as not to blind oncoming pedestrians and cyclists (not much I can do to help small children and dogs, sorry).
* most of my lights at home are Philips Hue White Ambiance, which allows me to dim the lights and change the colour temperature. Why can’t I have the same on my car (I used to always try and buy replacement headlight bulbs with a yellow tinge)?
** only sidelights are required on a road with street lighting and a speed limit of 30mph or less – I would happily drive on sidelights/daylight running lights where legally allowed, if it didn’t result in me being flashed*** by other drivers.
*** why does everyone use their full beams to flash, blinding oncoming people – why not flash by flicking your lights off and on again?
Just upgraded my front light
Just upgraded my front light from a cheap ~5l box ticker to 100l for those unlit cycle paths and feeling some serious lumin envy for the 800-200l dude ??
As someone with Scottish
As someone with Scottish heritage I look forward to seeing what the UCI has in store for that bonnie thread. Colour me intrigued!
I use a cheap cree xml-T6
I use a cheap cree xml-T6 claimed 1000lm led torch and sometimes I get negative stares on the road and see angry lips. But I can see the road with it.
Pedal reflectors are a legal
Pedal reflectors are a legal requirement between sunset and sunrise, so the minibus driver was technically correct.
I am moving over to clipless
I am moving over to clipless pedals and am wondering how people work this? There is no space for reflectors on the pedal.
In the eyes of the law, are reflectors on my shoes and legs an acceptable replacement?
(that is in addition to lights, reflectors on my bag, hi vis coat)
Shimano sell clip on
Shimano sell clip on reflectors for SPD-SLs and make SPD pedals with reflectors
Don’t worry, no one riding
Don’t worry, no one riding clipless uses them.
No but when you have all the
No, but when you have all the rest as you do, it’s hard to see what the complaint could be.
“I failed to see the cyclist with 4 rear lights, hi Viz jacket, reflectives on ankles, shoes, tights because they had no pedal reflectors.”
HoldingOn wrote:
[1] They flout the law.
[2] No.
The law’s an ass.
Cycling UK have a recently
Cycling UK have a recently (2022) updated summary of the lights and reflectors law. As others have said – the law’s a bit of an ass on this one.
If you use some types of handcycle (other than those frankly scary completely supine ones) what happens – or are they (currently) categorised as an “invalid carriage”? And should I take to my recumbent legally I wouldn’t have a leg to pedal with – I can’t stand on them, they’re out in front. In use the pedals in are turned 90 degrees from their position in an upright – aside from my body being in the way of a rear view. I guess I could mount a separate legal set of pedals somewhere – maybe on my head so they’d be visible front and back?
I think the intent of the law is reasonable though. I normally add reflective ankle bands at night on my upright bike as moving reflectives are attention-getting.
Thinking about it, you could
Thinking about it, you could just stick some reflective tape to the back of your pedals.
Reading through all the
Reading through all the replies, I think this is the way I will go. I looked at the Shimano reflectors, but you lose one side of clipping in to it. From images of clipless pedals, I’ll wrap some orange reflective tape around the spindle – that should cover the “front and rear of each pedal” requirement – the spindle is part of the pedal after all…
Jimmy Ray Will wrote:
Only if that reflective tape is marked with the relevant standard!:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/schedule/20/made
What a minefield!
What a minefield!
HoldingOn wrote:
I seriously wouldn’t sweat it, in 40+ years of riding I’ve literally never seen, heard or read of anyone being pulled for this. Just choose shoes with reflective detailing on the back (or add a bit of reflective tape) if you want the extra safety. If you’ve got lights on there’s not a copper in the land would bother to enforce that anachronistic regulation.
I will risk it with the
I will risk it with the modern reflective tape on my pedals, an led flashing ankle strap, reflective flashing on my shoes, leggings, the rear of my jacket and 2 or 3 rear lights. Still a few that claim they can’t see me! I really don’t think some outdated EU standard number will make the difference.
Outdated because it predates modern high tech reflectives.
Jimmy Ray Will wrote:
that is what I have done on my bikes.
ErnieC wrote:
It even stays on better than the cheap plastic reflectors that come with most flat pedals!
Not if the bike was built
Not if the bike was built before 1985 they aren’t 😉
I needed a new set of pedals
I needed a new set of pedals for the Ultimate Commuter, to replace my Wellgo MG1s, they’d had a good life, filth got into the right hand one and destroyed the bushes, even Wellgo have followed the trend and very few of their shin destroying flat pedals even have bolt holes for the fitting of pedal reflectors.
More MG1s, not a bad pedal and not particularly expensive.
I was told by a police
I was told by a police officer that most of their bicycles don’t have reflectors.
Whilst technically correct, I suspect pedal reflectors fitted will do nothing to improve safety.
Probs wont improve safety but
Probs wont improve safety but I do recall seeing an article suggesting that drivers associate the up down reflection with a cycle. I have discovered Decathlon do a runners red light powered by induction. Thus red led on each ankle powered by up/down movement.
Samtheeagle wrote:
Given the atitude of some drivers to cyclists is that a good thing?
I don’t think we should be
I don’t think we should be using the standards of the police as any form benchmark anymore…
ktache wrote:
The demise of the Traffic Division means that a typical police vehicle is driven by someone with no more than the standard minimum acceptable skills i.e. DVSA licence. Better than average Highway Code knowledge is all you can reasonably hope for…
Andrewbanshee wrote:
I’ve read articles which claim that pedal reflectors – if you can have them – are probably the most effective reflectors. Not only do they light up, but they move up and down, which gives a driver with a few working brain cells a clue that they are approaching a cyclist.
brooksby wrote:
I’ve read articles which claim that pedal reflectors – if you can have them – are probably the most effective reflectors. Not only do they light up, but they move up and down, which gives a driver with a few working brain cells a clue that they are approaching a cyclist.— Andrewbanshee
I find on a dark road, pedal reflectors are the first thing I’ll tend to notice, particularly if I’m driving with full beam on and the cycle is a long way in the distance (unless the cyclist is wearing a provis jacket or something).
OnYerBike wrote:
I ride audax events which often run through the night. The vast majority are on clipless pedals with no reflectors. (including me)
As far as i am aware no one has EVER been stopped by the police/fined/prosecuted for no pedal reflectors as long as they have working lights.
Reflectors on the shoe/bib tights are an adequate alternative from a practical consideration, they can be incredibly visible from a long distance. Even though legally it is not in accordance with the regs.
In my opinion the law needs updating as it comes from a time before hi vis garments and when lights were far less effective and less reliable than the modern models.
wycombewheeler wrote:
The introduction of mandatory daytime lights under Euro standards is responsible for destroying the effect of bicycle daytime lights below 100Cd.
The introduction of SUV designs that bring those running lights up to cycling body height further obscure vision and dazzle other road users.
High output LED on the average WankPanzer mean that borderline illegal lights are required for adequate visibility.
Does the Transport Research Laboratory have any point when this is allowed?
Institutional bias towards motor vehicles.
OnYerBike wrote:
Legal requirement, yes. Enforced? Not really.
I have not heard of an incident where such a rule has been enforced.
I do, however make the conscious decision to wear reflective straps on my ankles in adverse or night time conditions.
“Is one minute of your time
“Is one minute of your time worth someone’s life?”
That’s quite a different question to, “Is one minute of your time worth a cycist’s life?”, in the mind of your average motorist.
Given the multiple daily
Given the multiple daily examples many of us can cite where a driver has put either our own or other road users lives in danger, often just to save mere seconds, it feels a rhetorical question to pose.
Awavey wrote:
Or indeed to save no seconds at all, given the substantial number of London drivers I experience every day making dubious overtakes and close passes in order to get to the red light that’s clearly visible up ahead a bit more quickly.
making dubious overtakes and
making dubious overtakes and close passes in order to get to the red light that’s clearly visible up ahead a bit more quickly
Unfair! These dubious overtaking manoevres and close passes can be construed as much more reasonable when you realise that they’re not planning to pay any attention to the red light anyway
I’m pretty sure that time is
I’m pretty sure that time is not even a factor in some motorists’ behaviour. It appears to them that cyclists are vermin to be exterminated, and certainly worth making time to harass as I experience every time I go out.
Never attribute to malign
Never attribute to malign intent that which can be explained by incompetence.
Mungecrundle wrote:
Why not both?
I think it is a tad
I think it is a tad unreasonable of you to expect me to hold more than one thought in my head at any given time!
Will the look at the cycle
Will the look at the cycle lane the Mail doesn’t like ask the council why they’ve built it like that ?
They had the space, the money & seemingly will to do something,so why not build proper decent segregated infra to the LTN 1/20 standards, then you dont end up with some weird red pavement !?!?
Yesterday, on the live blog,
Yesterday, on the live blog, Seventyone (with the benefit of local knowledge) said that he did not recognise that stretch as being part of the “controversial” road narrowing schemeon the B7073 in Wimborne. It certainly doesn’t look the same – it’s not as wide and it’s RED. See all the other photos in the article.
I wondered if anyone else recognised the location? Perhaps the Daily Fail can’t ask the local council because they don’t know where it is?
The “controversial” Wimborne
The “controversial” Wimborne cycle lane is pretty good and as far as I can recall doesn’t have this red surface treatment. I’ll see if my Easter plans take me in that direction. There were some driver whinges about some road width being removed when it went in.
A big fat “so what?” from me, wherever it turns out to be.
The road is the road from
The road is the road from Wimborne Minster to the “hamburger” roundabout. Which has a 30mph speed limit which most drivers ignore. The cycle path despite being new suffers from all the usual defects that you would expect. The road is plenty wide enough, but drivers are marginally less likely to try and squeeze past when overtaking than before the cycle lane was added. There is loads of new housing currently being built along the south side of the road, for those that choose to use it the cycle lane will be an alternative to sharing a road with the usual crop of speeding vehicles driven by impatient people.
https://therantyhighwayman
https://therantyhighwayman.blogspot.com/2015/05/on-level.html
There are solutions.
That is what the daily mail
That is what the daily mail say it is, but I’m sure it’s not. The one in the photo is red, the one into/out of Wimborne is not.
Id add that the one into /out
Id add that the one into /out of Wimborne is actually pretty good. It makes it clear that you, as a person a bicycle, have priority over vehicles from side roads, and it doesn’t have the continual “pump track” feature, only having slight inclines leading up to level crossings.
It does suffer from
1. Not really going anywhere: as mentioned earlier the last bit into Wimborne is really hairy on a bike as it is very narrow and they decided that there would be no bike lane at this point, presumably as no space. This is where we get close passed all the time when going with my sons on bikes to the rugby club. At the other end it links (kind of) to more segregated cycle paths which go towards the airport, which is handy for all the times you want to cycle to your flight I guess
2. There is a lot of parking in it
3. Currently quite a lot of it is shut for roadworks and associated signage. As I mentioned yesterday one of the signs in the cylceway reads “beware cyclists in carriageway”
IanMK wrote:
You cannot possibly be suggesting that the DM failed to fact check and published something that wasn’t true? Apologise immediately! That’s practically libel and their reputation for honest journalism has been irrepairably damaged.
The cyclist not using the
The cyclist not using the cycle path appears to be a well equipped sports cyclist who could easily be riding over 18 mph and so would be obeying DoT guidance to use the road at such a speed. I’m sure if she had been on the cycle path the Mail would have taken its usual heads we win tails you lose approach and run an article on killer cyclists storming down the cycle path at speeds in excess of 20 mph just inches from innocent pedestrians.
Rendel Harris wrote:
I thought that applied to shared use paths, in this case the cycle lane is clearly seperate from the footway.
12mph for shared use.
12mph for shared use.
18mph for cycle lanes.
12 on shared pavement/path,
12 on shared pavement/path, 18 on segregated cycle tracks.
ETA sorry now seen S13SFC had already answered.
Re the Cycle Lane. I have
Re the Cycle Lane. I have been in meetings discussing new developments where the transport planner has shown drawings of similar in their proposals. New commuter routes for active travel should not be interrupted every 5metres by an access route used by a residential car x2. This is just a recipe for disaster. Harder to avoid in this setting where it is added retrospectively in available space. However, in new build it is unforgivable.
Daily mail and Twitter, I
Daily mail and Twitter, I mean seriously? If I want shitty hands I will use cheap bogroll rather than read any of that.
Maybe the DfTs graphic is
Maybe the DfTs graphic is designed to distract you from asking the more obvious relevant questions about what criteria makes these dangerous roads? and what improvements are being made to them?
I was recently accosted by a
I was recently accosted by a driver who told me that my front light was too bright, on 150 lumens. He then screamed off in his supercharged Range Rover SVR, which comes with 3000 lumen lights. Two of them, one in each corner!
According to a report
According to a report released by the Maryland State Highway Administration earlier this week, travel times for motorists heading northbound in the morning has increased by seven percent, or half a minute, since the bike lane was installed, while in the afternoon those travelling in the same direction face a stifling minute-long delay.
This equates to a staggering average journey time of just over 4 minutes, for a 30 second delay.
Just a suggestion but if the commute is that short, it may be quicker to go by bike.
https://twitter.com/drewsnx
https://twitter.com/drewsnx/status/1643901767430619141
Yep – this sounds silly but
Yep – this sounds silly but that’s how it works. Given the existence of “pedestrian flags” for you to wave when you’re crossing a massive road this doesn’t seem particularly far-fetched. Perhaps everyone needs to have a tall flag attached to their head, or just an app to let the cars know you’re there, without which you’re liable…
Notjustbikes has a long rant on how the particular SUV / pickup thing came about. The same applied to the rise of mass motoring in general however. The 3rd frame here reflects on the extremely successful PR which lead to the invention of jaywalking – here’s a real conspiracy for you, LTN-worriers!
The market is driving (ha) the fashion. Generally true but while we may accept that for (non-fatal) clothes or food fads this should give us pause when we’re talking about a free-for-all on public space and safety. (To say nothing of resource over use now this has reached our collective consciousness).
Legislation is (at best) struggling to “fix” the side-effects of having “nice things”. Which someone carefully designed so they’d seem nice, lobbied for and marketed (“don’t be left out” / “you NEED one for your kids now everyone else has one”).
You linked that suv one
You linked that suv one before – the 35 mins flew by* and the guy is a great presenter.
* started on my phone thinking it was only 7 or 8 mins but carried on as I was so engrossed.
Yep – but worth repeating
Yep – but worth repeating because there was quite a bit of “why not just let people drive what they want” / “objectors to these are really just envious or using these as a proxy for other discontents” on here.
Some of the antis may indeed be doing the latter. However these vehicles were not flogged to the public because the public were desparate for them. It started as a dodge (ho!) around some regulation of the motor industry. I think it’s all well-covered in the video.
One or two may not be destroying the world, but they’re being pushed in volume.
There really isn’t anything good about these things.
A chunk of afternoon just
A chunk of afternoon just vanished.
I may have seen it before too.
LMAO
LMAO