[AndyIT]

Came across such a group today and wondered what people’s views were. Personally I think they should have split into 2,groups on busier roads.

Topic

[Ratfink]

For the last year or so i’ve

For the last year or so i’ve been living in a village in Oxfordshire recently the bus service has doubled from one an hour to one every half hour,It’s amazing the difference this has made to getting about and whether i’d decide to drive or not. For example the next town across is 15 minutes away, It has a really nice little cinema and films start at 7.30 before i’d have  to get the 6.25 bus and hang around for 50 mins and often the film would end just after a bus, so another 40-50 mins hanging around in the dark,Think i did this once froze my nuts off and drove every other time.Now i can get there with only 20 mins hanging around and the cinema gets to sell a pint they otherwise wouldn’t.It really made a change, no more  whens the next bus? Sod it i’ll  drive, A car is still needed as the bus doesn’t go everywhere but my usage has cut down so much that i’m still running on petrol i put in at the beginning of April.

[qwerty360]

I have seen a road properly

I have seen a road properly blocked by an excessively large cycling group once.

 

Of course the group consisted of  something like :

6 people training for charity ride A.

8 from cycling club B

8 From cycling club C

6 from cycling club B (intentional split for 2 big group)

4 training for charity ride D

2 * 8 from cycling club E (originally split –  I was riding with 2nd group).

8 from club B behind us.

 

(Fairly sure even more riders behind them).

 

Basically every club ride starting within 50 miles happened to hit the road at the same time (almost all on return leg near home I suspect given direction + known start points).

 

I know my club has had a few cases with ‘oversized’ groups; Almost invariably they did split at start, but traffic/lights/puncture delayed the lead group enough for following group to catch them. Given group size when this happens, stopping would usually just leave a group blocking the road for longer than the remaining time to end/midpoint coffee stop… I know the other local clubs (and other cycling orgs, e.g. skyride) operate on the same basis – try to split the group; But having planned routes + coffee stops etc limits how much they can do this.

[Kapelmuur]

Recently I followed (in my

Recently I followed (in my car) for about 5 miles  a big group of club cyclists.   The road was narrow and twisting and each time there was a straight stretch which would have facilitated safe overtaking there was oncoming traffic.

It’s a road I frequently cycle on and I was happy to sit behind the group, watch what they were doing and think about my own rides on that road.

Another time on the same stretch I was behind a farm tractor and trailer travelling at the same speed as the cyclists had been.   I got annoyed at the delay and wanted the driver to pull in to allow faster traffic through.

I guess I have more empathy with cyclists than farmers.

[hawkinspeter]

Adam Sutton wrote:

True as that is, it doesn’t alter the fact that transport links are and always have been vastly different in rural and suburban areas compared to London and bigger cities/towns. Not saying this is you, but it has been clear here that many have a London centric view and no appreciation that it is not the same even in towns bordering London.

That’s a good point – I was brought up in London and now live in Bristol, so my view is naturally biased towards cities. However, Bristol doesn’t have good public transport at all, but interestingly, that gap can be quite successfully filled by e-scooters (e.g. VOI) for a lot of journeys.

[Adam Sutton]

hawkinspeter wrote:

I think a large part of declining public transport is that it’s often run for-profit and it’s not seen as economical to run a lot of rural services. It’s a catch-22 situation as people learn that the public transport is crap/non-existent and so have to rely on getting a car. Once they’ve got a car, they’re going to use it in preference to public transport and so the services don’t see as much demand (and thus profit). The issue with designing housing developments is that they’re often too distant from the shops and services that people require and so they can no longer walk a mile to get to their local doctor surgery etc.

True as that is, it doesn’t alter the fact that transport links are and always have been vastly different in rural and suburban areas compared to London and bigger cities/towns. Not saying this is you, but it has been clear here that many have a London centric view and no appreciation that it is not the same even in towns bordering London.

[IanGlasgow]

It would be better if they

It would be better if they road 2 (or more) abreast, making a shorter group that’s easier to pass. But then they’d get even more complaints from ignorant motorists (some of them also cyclists) about them “taking up the whole road”.

[brooksby]

hawkinspeter wrote:

I think a large part of declining public transport is that it’s often run for-profit and it’s not seen as economical to run a lot of rural services. It’s a catch-22 situation as people learn that the public transport is crap/non-existent and so have to rely on getting a car. Once they’ve got a car, they’re going to use it in preference to public transport and so the services don’t see as much demand (and thus profit). The issue with designing housing developments is that they’re often too distant from the shops and services that people require and so they can no longer walk a mile to get to their local doctor surgery etc.

True.  Bus services which might not be rammed on every journey but which are essential services for people who don’t drive, are often supported by council subsidy and in the present climate the subsidy gets cut off so the bus company says, “Sorry, its not economic to run that service”.  Look at all the current fuss around the village of Winterbourne north of Bristol, or the routes being cut in south Bristol.

[chrisonabike]

Seems we’re still building
Seems we’re still building new developments in my part of the world which assume and accommodate “everyone will drive” while all other other options come second, if at all. That includes active travel, public transport, putting places near amenities or even establishing new amenities to go with the housing.

If you couldn’t get a bus before, that’s one thing. (Although often people would have walked or cycled but that’s become much *less* appealing because of now sharing space with large and/or fast vehicles). But we’re still building in more of the same issues.

[hawkinspeter]

Adam Sutton wrote:

One of the stipulations of the first major housing development/expansion here was the inlcusion of a dedicated busway linking the development to the two major towns to the east/west. Additional developments have by and large been linked into this, with Amazon building a distribution depot in the area this also was linked and has added the benifit of expaning the service to run 24/7.

The issue isn’t “designing towns around the motor car” The issue is that MANY towns and villages in rural, or even as here, urban areas that were designed before the motor car do not have access to public transport in this way and never really have. Towns and villages like this close by were not integated into the new busway and services have actually reduced. Where my parents live in terms of its access has not changed in decades or really even a century or so, but you cannot get a bus there late. The last bus from their nearst train station is 19:28 (weekday).

These issues, and asinine memes are only black and white when you don’t want to look objectively at the bigger picture.

I think a large part of declining public transport is that it’s often run for-profit and it’s not seen as economical to run a lot of rural services. It’s a catch-22 situation as people learn that the public transport is crap/non-existent and so have to rely on getting a car. Once they’ve got a car, they’re going to use it in preference to public transport and so the services don’t see as much demand (and thus profit). The issue with designing housing developments is that they’re often too distant from the shops and services that people require and so they can no longer walk a mile to get to their local doctor surgery etc.

[Adam Sutton]

hawkinspeter wrote:

That’s one of the problems with designing towns around the motor car – it then becomes necessary as it crowds out all the other options. Even public transport becomes undesirable as virtually everyone living in such places will need to own a car anyway and thus the problem continues.

One of the stipulations of the first major housing development/expansion here was the inlcusion of a dedicated busway linking the development to the two major towns to the east/west. Additional developments have by and large been linked into this, with Amazon building a distribution depot in the area this also was linked and has added the benifit of expaning the service to run 24/7.

The issue isn’t “designing towns around the motor car” The issue is that MANY towns and villages in rural, or even as here, urban areas that were designed before the motor car do not have access to public transport in this way and never really have. Towns and villages like this close by were not integated into the new busway and services have actually reduced. Where my parents live in terms of its access has not changed in decades or really even a century or so, but you cannot get a bus there late. The last bus from their nearst train station is 19:28 (weekday).

These issues, and asinine memes are only black and white when you don’t want to look objectively at the bigger picture.

[quiff]

If you’d bother to read my

If you’d bother to read my posts properly, I’ve already said I actually agree with you. But what you’re failing to acknowledge is that the Highway Code actually says it’s considerate. You posed a question and purported to be interested in others’ views, but are clearly not actually here for a good faith discussion. Bye.      

[AndyIT]

Most people would disagree

Most people would disagree with you that its considerate cycling (no dispute on the legallity) but you don’t care about road sharing behaviour.  It’s a choice to be considerate.

[check12]

I do pay tax like a car, free

I do pay tax like a car, free less than x  g/km of carbon, like my petrol car is free. We’re registered with British cycling, and I have third party insurance. So you’re saying we should ride in a 30 peloton, great news! ??

[quiff]

You seem to be ignoring that

You seem to be ignoring that the Highway Code says it’s both legal and considerate, because it contradicts your view.

[AndyIT]

Indeed explanations provided

Indeed explanations provided but ignored; guessing this is because it contradicts the cyclists who believe that if it’s legal it’s fine. 

[Author]

Replies