Poll: RLJ'ers

feaseyrider

well i was waiting at the lights fortune green road and with my prime view of the road ,being a hgv driver , i could see a potential rlj'er sure enough she went for it how on earth she got away with it?
if this was you wait at the lights i'm a commuter too as well as the dreaded hgv driver but will leave plenty of room for my fellow two wheeled buddy's

what's the rush

always_tyred

spursn17 wrote:

Always Tyred, I'm afraid it's the latter.

I don't do it where I live (quiet town just outside London) but consider central London to be a different kettle of fish. Every driver seems so much more aggressive and I don't want to be mixed up in their stupidity.

I don't cycle in London. I would almost certainly not rlj any more down there.

But, I do appreciate that road manners are very different to some places. Christ, I did a 3 month stint in Glasgow and it was different even from Edinburgh. So I'm not really in a position to moralise.

Tell you what though, when I moved up here I noticed a real culture of cars running red lights. Generally drivers are pretty considerate - letting people filter in or change lanes on the motorway, that sort of thing. Definitely nicer to cycle than the south east (if only the Scottish Parliament could afford tarmac). However I very often find myself starting through a green, only for the last car to hammer through a junction above the speed limit.

I think that would really change your attitude to getting a head start through a junction; amber means "accelerate" (like in the rest of the UK) and red means "accelerate hard".

JoeSoap76

Always Tyred wrote:

Tell you what though, when I moved up here I noticed a real culture of cars running red lights. Generally drivers are pretty considerate - letting people filter in or change lanes on the motorway, that sort of thing. [..] However I very often find myself starting through a green, only for the last car to hammer through a junction above the speed limit.

I'm glad you say that - sometimes I feel like I'm the only one bothered by it.

I lived in Berkshire for 10 years and the number of aggressive tw@ts (and their levels of aggression) that I see up here in Glasgow is far lower than down South... but this whole thing of dashing through the lights even for the first five seconds after they've turned red (let alone amber) does seem to be a very Glasgow thing (don't know about Edinburgh).

It seems to have been getting gradually worse over the past few years (my other half and I often comment on it when we have to drive anywhere) - almost as though a few people tried it and got away with it so more and more are following suit.

It especially p*sses me off because to get into my street I have to sit at a set of lights with a filter lane but no designated green light for the turning. If people race through the red toward me when I'm sitting waiting to turn across them, by the time they've passed I end up blocking the cars who now have a green light to come out of my street.

It's definitely something I'm conscious of when out on my bike. Green lights are never taken for granted; I always look to make sure I'm not going to end up on the bonnet of a RLJ.

AndyManc

So ... when I'm biking to work at 5:30am do I stop at red lights ? :?

DO I **** :P

I run red lights when its safe to do so, usually when there's no vehicles coming through the green lit signals.

Of course, if this country had a decent seperated cycle infrastructure none of us would have to run reds .... would we. :evil:

dondare

Separated cycle paths increase the accident risks at junctions, and there would have to be junctions. Possibly with traffic lights, which some people would ignore....

AndyManc

dondare wrote:

Seperated cycle paths increase the accident risks at junctions, and there would have to be junctions. Possibly with traffic lights, which some people would ignore....

Not if they are designed by a half decent road planner they don't , and even if that was true, it's still a far better option than being dragged under a 10 ton lorry.

dondare

Would they be underground or on stilts?

AndyManc

We have junctions already, designs that priorities the movement of cycles would minimise any risk ( that exist already anyway ) , clearly you can't pedal forever without having to stop at some point, an optional cycle lane infrastructure would put your own safety in your own hands and not in the hands of some drunk/drugged/illegal Muppet in charge of a motor vehicle.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONS2ptAR4mo

dondare

You know, cycling really isn't that dangerous.

always_tyred

I don't think there's any fundamental incompatibility between motor vehicles and cycles, or any other means of conveyance. I can certainly manage to live with cyclists as a driver and I'm sure that you all can.

Completely seperated cycle infrastructure, in this country at least, would only serve to reinforce the preception of drivers that there IS an incompatibility and that bikes don't belong on the road.

Besides, where are the lanes going to go? Cut down one lane of traffic for cyclists? Don't think that would be very popular.

AndyManc

Always Tyred wrote:

I don't think there's any fundamental incompatibility between motor vehicles and cycles, or any other means of conveyance. I can certainly manage to live with cyclists as a driver and I'm sure that you all can.

.

:evil: Is this a cycling forum or a car one, it's not a case of "living with cyclists" , it's a case of stopping the carnage on the roads and reversing the damage both social and environmentally the motor vehicle has done.

And who care's if "Cut down one lane of traffic for cyclists? Don't think that would be very popular. " , as far as I'm concerned this site is for the promotion of cycling , not for the defence of the motorist :evil:

dondare

The creation of segregated cycle lanes or paths would be unpopular with a lot of cyclists. Also, if cycling is to be accepted by everyone it must be acceptable to everyone which will not be the case if it's proponents make unreasonable demands. Cycling needs to be made safer on the roads, not kept off them.

AndyManc

dondare wrote:

The creation of segregated cycle lanes or paths would be unpopular with a lot of cyclists. Also, if cycling is to be accepted by everyone it must be acceptable to everyone which will not be the case if it's proponents make unreasonable demands. Cycling needs to be made safer on the roads, not kept off them.

Cycle lanes will only be unpopular with some bikers if cyclists were enforced to use them.

Time after time research cites the reason why the majority of the population ( inc. kids ) will not cycle and that is because of serious safety concerns and rightly so.

It's not unreasonable to expect a government to take urgent action in the light of an immanent environmental catastrophe brought on by the massive economic expanse of China and India, a situation that will only get far worse.

Cycling will never be safe on the roads , everyone knows there's been a massive decline in driving standards that’s gone hand in hand with the decline in the behaviour of society as a whole.

dondare

Cycling on the road simply isn't as dangerous as most people believe. It's less dangerous than walking, and pedestrians do have their own paths. We need to persuade people that cycling is safe, not reinforce their phobias and prejudices by claiming that segregated cycleways are necessary.

"It's not unreasonable to expect a government to take urgent action in the light of an immanent environmental catastrophe brought on by the massive economic expanse of China and India, a situation that will only get far worse. "

Yes it is unreasonable. The only urgent action that this Government is capable of is increasing pay and expenses to MPs.

karl j

Surf-Matt wrote:

Don't see a single set of lights in my 10 mile "commute" every day

Hi Matt, i've been thinking about that since you posted it. No, i can't remember any traffic lights when i used to ride into work (Malpas marina) from Trispen. There was a set at the end of Tregolls Rd / Newquay road but i always bypassed it by going down the (Mitchell ?) hill . So, no, no lights in 14 mile round trip . Different story now though...

Back to the OT, i voted that i occasionally do. So i aren't going to complain at others who do the same thing.
And yes i know it's wrong, but the way i see it, when i pull up to a red light and the sensor doesn't see me at 10.30 pm i aren't waiting til 5.30 am tomorrow for the milk float to come along and activate the fekkin thing.

always_tyred

AndyManc wrote:

dondare wrote:

The creation of segregated cycle lanes or paths would be unpopular with a lot of cyclists. Also, if cycling is to be accepted by everyone it must be acceptable to everyone which will not be the case if it's proponents make unreasonable demands. Cycling needs to be made safer on the roads, not kept off them.

Cycle lanes will only be unpopular with some bikers if cyclists were enforced to use them.

Time after time research cites the reason why the majority of the population ( inc. kids ) will not cycle and that is because of serious safety concerns and rightly so.

It's not unreasonable to expect a government to take urgent action in the light of an immanent environmental catastrophe brought on by the massive economic expanse of China and India, a situation that will only get far worse.

Cycling will never be safe on the roads , everyone knows there's been a massive decline in driving standards that’s gone hand in hand with the decline in the behaviour of society as a whole.

I don't think you are quite getting what we are trying to say.

Look, I commute by bike but I just love to ride my bike anyway. I like the freedom and I think I should be allowed to choose to cycle wherever I want to go (with the exeption of motorways and mental dual carriageways).

To my mind, the segregation of cycle lanesis only worthwhile when it solves a problem or creates a big advantage for cyclists. For example, tow paths or routes along rivers that b-line bikes into city centres.

While the concept of nice open segregated bike paths is attractive in theory, the implementation of it in ths country would be (1) shared, so we'd be dodging dogs and pedestrians. I don't know about you, but almost without exception, its impossible to train on a cycle route in this country because of htat. (2) unmaintained. Get your self sealing tubes ready and ensure that you are ready to clean your bike every day in winter. Last year's leaf fall will still be there as will fragments of that bottle of buckfast. (3) gravel. A bike is something with knobbly tyres and suspension, right? (4) the bike lane would be subsurviant to anything crossing it. I use one in Edinburgh that has an elaborate ped/bike crossing that the cyclist has to activate as it defaults to green for the cars, across an entrance to a bank hq that has about 10 director's cars drive through on a given day. A default to green for the cyclist and an induction loop for the odd cars that pass through would make sense, but no.

Also, I warn you, if you make these lanes in this country, regardless of compulsion by law, agression to anyone NOT using them will increase dramatically. Haven't you ever been abused for not using a cycle lane? I've been abused for not using a cyle lane that was
- about 100 yards long
- down a hill that I was travelling on at the speed limit
- had no ramp to access
- runs along a road with extremely wide lanes that used to be 2 narrow lanes

The driver had to slow down to tell me to get off the road and stop holding him up.

I want to cycle on roads and have cars share the road with me. We shouldn't need engineering to make this possible. Its possible now. I drive and when I encounter cyclists, I don't find any problem driving around them and continuing my journey. So there's no problem with the roads, just the drivers.

dondare

This was an RLJ thread. Perhaps we should start a cycle-lane thread. I have views about both.

AndyManc

Always Tyred wrote:

AndyManc wrote:

dondare wrote:

The creation of segregated cycle lanes or paths would be unpopular with a lot of cyclists. Also, if cycling is to be accepted by everyone it must be acceptable to everyone which will not be the case if it's proponents make unreasonable demands. Cycling needs to be made safer on the roads, not kept off them.

Cycle lanes will only be unpopular with some bikers if cyclists were enforced to use them.

Time after time research cites the reason why the majority of the population ( inc. kids ) will not cycle and that is because of serious safety concerns and rightly so.

It's not unreasonable to expect a government to take urgent action in the light of an immanent environmental catastrophe brought on by the massive economic expanse of China and India, a situation that will only get far worse.

Cycling will never be safe on the roads , everyone knows there's been a massive decline in driving standards that’s gone hand in hand with the decline in the behaviour of society as a whole.

For example, tow paths or routes along rivers that b-line bikes into city centres.

(2) unmaintained. Get your self sealing tubes ready and ensure that you are ready to clean your bike every day in winter. Last year's leaf fall will still be there as will fragments of that bottle of buckfast.

Haven't you ever been abused for not using a cycle lane?

I want to cycle on roads and have cars share the road with me. We shouldn't need engineering to make this possible. Its possible now. I drive and when I encounter cyclists, I don't find any problem driving around them and continuing my journey. So there's no problem with the roads, just the drivers.

Quick response .... There are serious security issues with off-road tow paths and there have been a number of attacks on bikers , it's a growing problem.

I agree, cycle lanes are poorly maintained ( it must be improved, and it shows how little respect this country has for cyclists ) as are the roads ,many are pot holed ridden hell holes ... cycle lanes do not suffer the same pounding roads get.

Why would anyone want to share their journey with a 20 ton lorry spewing exhaust fumes into your mouth if their was an alternative.

Cycle routes should be given priority over roads for vehicles , up until now cycle lanes a have never been a priority they are built to fulfil EU targets with no real intention to change the publics perception of travel.

Just because you as an individual drive around cyclists that doesn't mean the majority of motorists do, in fact quite the reverse happens, and no I have never been abused for not using a bike lane , and if anyone tried , they wouldn't get away with it.



Now here's the crux of the matter ... and I agree , the main problem is driving standards and attitudes .... but you are NOT going to change that , even if every car was fitted with a 'black box' and tracked by satellite .

The numbers of drugged and drunk drivers is escalating as sickenly demonstrated by the number of bikers that have been left for dead in the gutter by hit and run drivers in my area.

The police are reporting serious issues concerning the attitude towards drink driving from the immigrant population, not to mention the thousands of motorists that continue to use their mobile phones whilst driving .... I see dozens everyday, as long as we keep the status quo the masses will not be tempted into cycling.


We live in a selfish , selfish society ..... cyclists don't exist in their world.

always_tyred

Have you considered working for the Manchester tourist board?

Look, I pretty much agree with everything you have said, but I'mnot quite as pessimistic.

Anyway. I don't think that people should run red lights.