Your rants here.

N0bodyOfTheGoat

Ouch @Mattsaw gws!

veronese68

Ouch! "Wow! Even I can see that's phucked." As I overheard a nurse say when my ribs were x-rayed a few years back.
Hope it heals fast and well.

elbowloh

awavey wrote:

elbowloh wrote:

Odd article in the Guardian about why women shun cycling.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ling-roads

The comments are as expected.

whats odd about it ? and yes the comments do seem full of the usual expected mansplaining,

That the sub is turning road design in to a feminist issue, blaming men for designing roads against the needs of women, when really it's against the needs of cyclists.

mattsaw

hopkinb wrote:

Fugginell Mattsaw, I think you've bust your arm there. Heal up quickly. How did that happen?

Braking and slowing for a roundabout, I lost the back week on some gravel/loose tarmac and seemed to go down in installments.

I think it's just a case of landing awkwardly with my bodyweight on my arm rather than the initial impact, which could have been at no more than 10mph.

All my accidents seem to be at slow speed, maybe I need to learn from that!

The medical staff of Kingston were brilliant again, seen in no time, overnight and then first in the queue for an op the next morning.

rick_chasey

Train commutes.

kingstongraham

Ouch Matt. Heal well. Hope to see you back on Castelnau on Strava soon.

rower63

Rick Chasey wrote:

Train commutes.

yes. the rage you have to suppress, day in, day out, has an effect on the personality

rower63

elbowloh wrote:

awavey wrote:

elbowloh wrote:

Odd article in the Guardian about why women shun cycling.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ling-roads

The comments are as expected.

whats odd about it ? and yes the comments do seem full of the usual expected mansplaining,

That the sub is turning road design in to a feminist issue, blaming men for designing roads against the needs of women, when really it's against the needs of cyclists.

I thought it odd too, replace references to women with "anybody" and the point is the same. Her implication is that women are intrinsically more easily scared and road design must take account of that. The article is implicitly sexist.

veronese68

Mattsaw wrote:

The medical staff of Kingston were brilliant again, seen in no time, overnight and then first in the queue for an op the next morning.

That's been my experience of them. Go into A&E with an emergency and you are straight in and get very good care. For a non-emergency I can put up with the waiting because I know they are dealing with someone that has been waiting longer or is in more urgent need. It's not like they are sitting on their arses.

rick_chasey

rower63 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Train commutes.

yes. the rage you have to suppress, day in, day out, has an effect on the personality

It's the naked shamelessness of the staff too.

Absolutely no appreciation of the grief they cause.

I've unfortunately and accidentally attended one of the operator conferences, where they all genuinely think they're doing a great job since their entire metric is based on how many passengers use their services.

High fives all around.

I have it on some good authority that a certain high profile train operator had an office day out recently to celebrate getting through the timetable change - I sh!t you not.

timothyw

Just had an email saying I got into the second Ride London 46 ballot draw.

The first email saying I hadn't got in, nearly a month ago, included this text:
Please note: charity places and sponsors’ competitions are now the only available ways to ride in the 2018 Prudential RideLondon-Surrey 46. There aren’t any more ballot or discretionary places available and we will therefore not be able to accept any further entries under any circumstances.

Makes them look a bit disorganised doesn't it? Makes little difference to me as I'm in on a team entry to the 100 now anyway, but you can see how people who had been holding off on making summer holiday plans might be pissed off.

roger_merriman

Veronese68 wrote:

Mattsaw wrote:

The medical staff of Kingston were brilliant again, seen in no time, overnight and then first in the queue for an op the next morning.

That's been my experience of them. Go into A&E with an emergency and you are straight in and get very good care. For a non-emergency I can put up with the waiting because I know they are dealing with someone that has been waiting longer or is in more urgent need. It's not like they are sitting on their arses.

NHS in my experience as well both personally and with others in various hospitals.

elbowloh

roger merriman wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

Mattsaw wrote:

The medical staff of Kingston were brilliant again, seen in no time, overnight and then first in the queue for an op the next morning.

That's been my experience of them. Go into A&E with an emergency and you are straight in and get very good care. For a non-emergency I can put up with the waiting because I know they are dealing with someone that has been waiting longer or is in more urgent need. It's not like they are sitting on their arses.

NHS in my experience as well both personally and with others in various hospitals.

I love the NHS and the concept of healthcare free at the point of use is something i will defend until the day I die.

However, my two recent experiences have been poor. My mum passed away from lung cancer 3 weeks ago and the delays in diagnosis, getting treatment and then the understanding of her treatment (various departments took action as if she was on chemo when she wasn't, but rather immunotherapy) was very poor.

My partner and I have also had pretty poor treatment recently, for a couple of issues which I don't really want to get into.

I don't blame the staff, I really don't. I think they are stretched to the absolute limit (and probably beyond it) by the real-term cuts and the "no top-down re-organisations" of the NHS. They have been failed by those in government for years.

This is the rants thread right?

veronese68

elbowloh wrote:

This is the rants thread right?

I completely agree with you on the first point, unfortunately I believe you are right about the rest of it too and it warrants a lot more than just a rant. Sorry for your loss and also the problems you have had.

roger_merriman

elbowloh wrote:

roger merriman wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

Mattsaw wrote:

The medical staff of Kingston were brilliant again, seen in no time, overnight and then first in the queue for an op the next morning.

That's been my experience of them. Go into A&E with an emergency and you are straight in and get very good care. For a non-emergency I can put up with the waiting because I know they are dealing with someone that has been waiting longer or is in more urgent need. It's not like they are sitting on their arses.

NHS in my experience as well both personally and with others in various hospitals.

I love the NHS and the concept of healthcare free at the point of use is something i will defend until the day I die.

However, my two recent experiences have been poor. My mum passed away from lung cancer 3 weeks ago and the delays in diagnosis, getting treatment and then the understanding of her treatment (various departments took action as if she was on chemo when she wasn't, but rather immunotherapy) was very poor.

My partner and I have also had pretty poor treatment recently, for a couple of issues which I don't really want to get into.

I don't blame the staff, I really don't. I think they are stretched to the absolute limit (and probably beyond it) by the real-term cuts and the "no top-down re-organisations" of the NHS. They have been failed by those in government for years.

This is the rants thread right?

NHS is far better at the acute than the chronic, I only got neuro rehab due to local charity who got me back in the system. And even after that being transferred from services, the appointments arrived long before the report, so various therapists where having to do it blind etc.

The company I work for is doing a campaign regarding Learning Disablity in the NHS where folks aren’t given the time, adjustments so care can end up being poor, sadly GP’s are worse for this in my experience, possibly because they are the front line.

hopkinb

elbowloh wrote:

However, my two recent experiences have been poor. My mum passed away from lung cancer 3 weeks ago and the delays in diagnosis, getting treatment and then the understanding of her treatment (various departments took action as if she was on chemo when she wasn't, but rather immunotherapy) was very poor.

Condolences elbowloh.

Weird question perhaps, but do you have a brother who works at a German bank?

elbowloh

hopkinb wrote:

elbowloh wrote:

However, my two recent experiences have been poor. My mum passed away from lung cancer 3 weeks ago and the delays in diagnosis, getting treatment and then the understanding of her treatment (various departments took action as if she was on chemo when she wasn't, but rather immunotherapy) was very poor.

Condolences elbowloh.

Weird question perhaps, but do you have a brother who works at a German bank?

Ha. yes!

hopkinb

elbowloh wrote:

hopkinb wrote:

elbowloh wrote:

However, my two recent experiences have been poor. My mum passed away from lung cancer 3 weeks ago and the delays in diagnosis, getting treatment and then the understanding of her treatment (various departments took action as if she was on chemo when she wasn't, but rather immunotherapy) was very poor.

Condolences elbowloh.

Weird question perhaps, but do you have a brother who works at a German bank?

Ha. yes!

Ah, he normally sits approx. 3 metres away from me!

elbowloh

hopkinb wrote:

elbowloh wrote:

hopkinb wrote:

elbowloh wrote:

However, my two recent experiences have been poor. My mum passed away from lung cancer 3 weeks ago and the delays in diagnosis, getting treatment and then the understanding of her treatment (various departments took action as if she was on chemo when she wasn't, but rather immunotherapy) was very poor.

Condolences elbowloh.

Weird question perhaps, but do you have a brother who works at a German bank?

Ha. yes!

Ah, he normally sits approx. 3 metres away from me!

Stalker?

confused@BR

As far as the NHS is concerned I've had the same experience, urgent stuff really good, routine stuff not so much. It puzzled me for a while then an unkind thought crossed my mind..... Influential people (rich) have emergencies which require prompt action. Other matters, they have the time to buy treatment.
Utter stuff and nonsense of course.

awavey

elbowloh wrote:

awavey wrote:

elbowloh wrote:

Odd article in the Guardian about why women shun cycling.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ling-roads

The comments are as expected.

whats odd about it ? and yes the comments do seem full of the usual expected mansplaining,

That the sub is turning road design in to a feminist issue, blaming men for designing roads against the needs of women, when really it's against the needs of cyclists.

I didnt pick that up myself, I dont fwiw think road designers are sexist and that wasnt the point I think Helens article was making, though I know the comments section then majored on it in typical gruaniad style, but there is clearly a large percentage of women who dont cycle because they see or experience the roads to be far too dangerous to cycle on.

its not unreasonable to question why is it that road designers keep designing roads that exclude proper cycling provision that clearly alot of women would prefer, because the survey wasnt a surprise to me at all,just roll back up a few rants, I was nearly squished by a bus and a car last week,no doubt my obituary report would have claimed it was because I was reluctant to “own” the lane enough, yeah you try owning the lane with 12 tonnes of bus breathing down your neck, I wasnt worrying about whether my helmet was messing up my hair at that point.

maybe more men put up with the lack of segregated cycling lanes because they are adrenalin junkies, or like the combativeness/aggression I dont know, it tends to make me question why on earth Im putting myself at that kind of risk when I can just hop in a car instead.

rjsterry

Rick Chasey wrote:

Train commutes.

This. Innumerable site meetings have meant me having to (try to) use Thameslink pretty much every day over the last couple of weeks. One week every single train I tried to catch was cancelled.

N0bodyOfTheGoat

https://m.facebook.com/315310545339960/ ... 078577502/

I think most of us would want the book thrown at the offenders, if we were the horse and rider and they were motor vehicles...

What a bunch of Muppets!

That horse stayed amazingly calm considering, could have done a lot of damage to itself, its rider and the muppets. Hopefully the horse has not been permanently traumatized when out on roads.

kimchiwitrice

---begin rant----
People with headphones and/or no lights.
---end rant---

rjsterry

NitrousOxide wrote:

https://m.facebook.com/315310545339960/posts/782935078577502/

I think most of us would want the book thrown at the offenders, if we were the horse and rider and they were motor vehicles...

What a bunch of Muppets!

That horse stayed amazingly calm considering, could have done a lot of damage to itself, its rider and the muppets. Hopefully the horse has not been permanently traumatized when out on roads.

Bloody hell! That is some A+ grade idiocy. Glad to see that it is being investigated and I would have thought not difficult to identify the culprits.

slowbike

rjsterry wrote:

NitrousOxide wrote:

https://m.facebook.com/315310545339960/posts/782935078577502/

I think most of us would want the book thrown at the offenders, if we were the horse and rider and they were motor vehicles...

What a bunch of Muppets!

That horse stayed amazingly calm considering, could have done a lot of damage to itself, its rider and the muppets. Hopefully the horse has not been permanently traumatized when out on roads.

Bloody hell! That is some A+ grade idiocy. Glad to see that it is being investigated and I would have thought not difficult to identify the culprits.

yup - and nullify their results from the triathlon.

veronese68

Slowbike wrote:

yup - and nullify their results from the triathlon.

If I was the organiser I'd ban them from any future events.

slowbike

awavey wrote:

its not unreasonable to question why is it that road designers keep designing roads that exclude proper cycling provision that clearly alot of women would prefer, because the survey wasnt a surprise to me at all,just roll back up a few rants, I was nearly squished by a bus and a car last week,no doubt my obituary report would have claimed it was because I was reluctant to “own” the lane enough, yeah you try owning the lane with 12 tonnes of bus breathing down your neck, I wasnt worrying about whether my helmet was messing up my hair at that point.

maybe more men put up with the lack of segregated cycling lanes because they are adrenalin junkies, or like the combativeness/aggression I dont know, it tends to make me question why on earth Im putting myself at that kind of risk when I can just hop in a car instead.

I don't want segregated cycle lanes around here. We have a few and they're dreadful. IMHO, they're aimed at the rider who ambles along - not the serious commuter or road cyclist. The reason I say that is that they stop whenever the road gets narrow, or at junctions, gives priorities to cars and whatever else they can do to prevent a reasonable flow of cycling - then they take them off the road onto shared paths frequented by many pedestrians.

IMHO, the cycle path outside places where there is a significant number of cyclists, is a waste of time and resources and quite frankly - dangerous.
By segregating cyclists onto inferior paths/lanes it's actively discriminating against cyclists.
Road users expect cyclists to use the inferior paths/lanes and some then get angry when cyclists don't use them.
Road users expect cyclists not to be on the road - even when there isn't a cycle path.

wolfsbane2k

Slowbike wrote:

awavey wrote:

its not unreasonable to question why is it that road designers keep designing roads that exclude proper cycling provision that clearly alot of women would prefer, because the survey wasnt a surprise to me at all,just roll back up a few rants, I was nearly squished by a bus and a car last week,no doubt my obituary report would have claimed it was because I was reluctant to “own” the lane enough, yeah you try owning the lane with 12 tonnes of bus breathing down your neck, I wasnt worrying about whether my helmet was messing up my hair at that point.

maybe more men put up with the lack of segregated cycling lanes because they are adrenalin junkies, or like the combativeness/aggression I dont know, it tends to make me question why on earth Im putting myself at that kind of risk when I can just hop in a car instead.

I don't want segregated cycle lanes around here. We have a few and they're dreadful. IMHO, they're aimed at the rider who ambles along - not the serious commuter or road cyclist. The reason I say that is that they stop whenever the road gets narrow, or at junctions, gives priorities to cars and whatever else they can do to prevent a reasonable flow of cycling - then they take them off the road onto shared paths frequented by many pedestrians.

IMHO, the cycle path outside places where there is a significant number of cyclists, is a waste of time and resources and quite frankly - dangerous.
By segregating cyclists onto inferior paths/lanes it's actively discriminating against cyclists.
Road users expect cyclists to use the inferior paths/lanes and some then get angry when cyclists don't use them.
Road users expect cyclists not to be on the road - even when there isn't a cycle path.

Generally I agree with you - West Sussex and Hampshire both have a lot of shocking "attempts", all of which fail spectacularly when they are really needed. The problem is not the idea of segregated tracks, but the lack of willpower in delivering them.Cycle tracks are the right answer to mass utility cycling, but they actually needs to be a network of them, at, or exceeding guidelines.
May I suggest you have a chat with your local WSCF team, and if possible help them to map out what does exist that meets guidelines? Over this way, havant & Portsmouth full network of cycle lanes becomes almost empty when you compare it to the standards that they are meant to build and designed too..

Take cycle bath's map of bath for example. (https://cyclebath.org.uk/)

slowbike

The argument is that we already have a network of cyclepaths in Hampshire and West Sussex - they're called Roads ...

What's needed is education, respect and enforcement of existing laws to make roads usable by everyone. Perhaps with a nationwide recognition that cyclists can use footpaths below a certain speed - with priority for the pedestrians. That would mean that cyclepaths are not required, road users would expect to see and know how to deal with other users on the road and we all can get on our way.

Now I'll admit I do use one shared cyclepath on a weekly basis - it goes from our home to my sons pre-school - we ride there and back. The alternatives are shared cyclepath along path beside the road (shockingly bad surface and usually overgrown) or country A road - cars thundering past at 50-60mph whilst I'm towing a 3yo at ~10mph - no thanks - but I'm happy to ride that road myself.

Getting into town by bike we have limited options - we can go down the shared path which is ok, but busy with pedestrians or we can go down that same A road with a "cycle path" that gives way at the slightest opportunity - if we were allowed to, we could ride the pavement all the way - which would be far more sensible IMHO.