Debate on cycling in HoC

EKE_38BPM

Fat Bloke told he could do L'etape du Tour next year if he pulls his finger out.

bails87

walkingbootweather wrote:

"Treat cyclists as if they were a young girl on horseback"

I've been longing for an ad campaign along the same lines....and not just so I can see a horse riding lady in jodphurs.

Horses get respect, bikes don't.

phy2sll2

Lol, big shout out for Lewisham roundabout and the ruts on the A2 there!

bigmat

Rick Chasey wrote:

EKE_38BPM wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Can't listen to any of it.

What's the point about pavement riding?

I cycled on the pavement every day to school and back till I was 11.

Kids riding on the road is fine. DDD laying down the Power Awesome, not so much.
Some adults ride on the pavement and ride too fast, thats the problem.

Have they been considering why they're there?

From my observation, usually because they're too pussy to ride in the traffic / have no lights.

CiB

walkingbootweather wrote:

"Treat cyclists as if they were a young girl on horseback"

Does that mean walk behind them with a shovel to pick up the residue after they have gone?

Oh yes please. Does this mean following them at 3mph for a couple of miles until they turn round tell me to clear orf, and they turn out to be old munters anyway and not some sprightly horsey type in her early 20s?

Hometime. Hurrah.

shouldbeinbed

bails87 wrote:

walkingbootweather wrote:

"Treat cyclists as if they were a young girl on horseback"

I've been longing for an ad campaign along the same lines....and not just so I can see a horse riding lady in jodphurs.

Horses get respect, bikes don't.

horses are a ton of irrational nerves with big heavy hooves at the end of long reach levers. they scare other road users more than inspire respect.

Maybe we should be armes with little machine guns on the front forks to get the same thing going.

notsoblue

So was this meeting called because it was topical or was it planned anyway?

rick_chasey

notsoblue wrote:

So was this meeting called because it was topical or was it planned anyway?

No idea. Likely to be the former.

EKE_38BPM

notsoblue wrote:

So was this meeting called because it was topical or was it planned anyway?

Its a nice day, but I wouldn't call it a tropical debate![/bad joke]

No, it was called because it is topical. Times campaign and all that.

notsoblue

EKE_38BPM wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

So was this meeting called because it was topical or was it planned anyway?

Its a nice day, but I wouldn't call it a tropical debate![/bad joke]

No, it was called because it is topical. Times campaign and all that.

Thats interesting.

All it takes is for a journalist to get injured to provoke debate like this!

rick_chasey

notsoblue wrote:

EKE_38BPM wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

So was this meeting called because it was topical or was it planned anyway?

Its a nice day, but I wouldn't call it a tropical debate![/bad joke]

No, it was called because it is topical. Times campaign and all that.

Thats interesting.

All it takes is for a journalist to get injured to provoke debate like this!

Or killed in the case of Syria.

tgotb

notsoblue wrote:

What a brilliant point about the school run. Was just a list item but this should really be emphasized more. The volume of traffic caused by the school run, which is easily a cycleable distance, is huge. Most noticeable by its absence during school holidays. If it was safe enough for kids to cycle to school this wouldn't be a problem. More should be made of this.

My 5-year-old is in A&E at this very moment, as a result of an injury sustained whilst cycling home from school.

That said, I highly suspect that the incident was caused by an attempt to show off, probably trying to ride no-hands, no-feet along the towpath, so it's more a reflection on my daughter's attitude to risk than on the safety of kids' cycling in general...

rick_chasey

TGOTB wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

What a brilliant point about the school run. Was just a list item but this should really be emphasized more. The volume of traffic caused by the school run, which is easily a cycleable distance, is huge. Most noticeable by its absence during school holidays. If it was safe enough for kids to cycle to school this wouldn't be a problem. More should be made of this.

My 5-year-old is in A&E at this very moment, as a result of an injury sustained whilst cycling home from school.

That said, I highly suspect that the incident was caused by an attempt to show off, probably trying to ride no-hands, no-feet along the towpath, so it's more a reflection on my daughter's attitude to risk than on the safety of kids' cycling in general...

Oh dear.

I remember racing my best mate home. I was losing so I cycled into him to crash. I got up quicker than he did so I won.

I was about 7.

notsoblue

TGOTB wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

What a brilliant point about the school run. Was just a list item but this should really be emphasized more. The volume of traffic caused by the school run, which is easily a cycleable distance, is huge. Most noticeable by its absence during school holidays. If it was safe enough for kids to cycle to school this wouldn't be a problem. More should be made of this.

My 5-year-old is in A&E at this very moment, as a result of an injury sustained whilst cycling home from school.

That said, I highly suspect that the incident was caused by an attempt to show off, probably trying to ride no-hands, no-feet along the towpath, so it's more a reflection on my daughter's attitude to risk than on the safety of kids' cycling in general...

True true. But I don't see many 5 yr olds on Upper Richmond Road (or any of the main roads in London) and thats not because they're being protected from their own tendency to show off. Not all school runs need to use busy main roads of course, but many do.

EKE_38BPM

Kids have crashes. I bet she's learnt not to try that again.

I hope she's OK and that she is allowed to continue riding.

tgotb

EKE_38BPM wrote:

Kids have crashes. I bet she's learnt not to try that again.

TBH she will probably keep trying the same trick until she figures out how to do it. I'm investigating the possibilities of getting a season ticket for the hospital car park.

EKE_38BPM wrote:

I hope she's OK and that she is allowed to continue riding.

Yep, she'll be riding to school again tomorrow. If to was up to her she'd probably have ridden to the hospital too...

EKE_38BPM

TGOTB wrote:

EKE_38BPM wrote:

Kids have crashes. I bet she's learnt not to try that again.

TBH she will probably keep trying the same trick until she figures out how to do it. I'm investigating the possibilities of getting a season ticket for the hospital car park.

EKE_38BPM wrote:

I hope she's OK and that she is allowed to continue riding.

Yep, she'll be riding to school again tomorrow. If to was up to her she'd probably have ridden to the hospital too...

I like her attitude.



Back OT:
"Would you like a ministerial car?"
"No, but I'll have a ministerial Brompton"

That I like!

phy2sll2

Baker's being very guarded, but I suppose that's to be expected.

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

TGOTB wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

What a brilliant point about the school run. Was just a list item but this should really be emphasized more. The volume of traffic caused by the school run, which is easily a cycleable distance, is huge. Most noticeable by its absence during school holidays. If it was safe enough for kids to cycle to school this wouldn't be a problem. More should be made of this.

My 5-year-old is in A&E at this very moment, as a result of an injury sustained whilst cycling home from school.

That said, I highly suspect that the incident was caused by an attempt to show off, probably trying to ride no-hands, no-feet along the towpath, so it's more a reflection on my daughter's attitude to risk than on the safety of kids' cycling in general...

True true. But I don't see many 5 yr olds on Upper Richmond Road (or any of the main roads in London) and thats not because they're being protected from their own tendency to show off. Not all school runs need to use busy main roads of course, but many do.

People work further and need to drive to work, while dropping kids off on the school run. Travel in London is a nightmare so having to wait for the kids to ride to to school and then set off for work (what do you do with their bikes) is also a nightmare.

Ms DDD doesn't cycle if she take Sproket to school it won't be by bike, if it is he'll be with her on the pavement/cycle path through a park.

The roads are for adults even as a youngin I wasn't too sure about riding on the road until I was about 15. Even then I hopped between pavement and road.

There are many reasons why kids don't ride to school along with the roads aren't safe.

rick_chasey

DonDaddyD wrote:

Ms DDD doesn't cycle

Err why not?!

DonDaddyD wrote:

if she take Sproket to school it won't be by bike, if it is he'll be with her on the pavement/cycle path through a park.

My mum would tootle down the road level with me while I raced down the pavement.

Wasn't the busiest road...

DonDaddyD wrote:

The roads are for adults even as a youngin I wasn't too sure about riding on the road until I was about 15. Even then I hopped between pavement and road.

There are many reasons why kids don't ride to school along with the roads aren't safe.

Would you feel different if it was a segregated cycle path? :P

EKE_38BPM

DonDaddyD wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

TGOTB wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

What a brilliant point about the school run. Was just a list item but this should really be emphasized more. The volume of traffic caused by the school run, which is easily a cycleable distance, is huge. Most noticeable by its absence during school holidays. If it was safe enough for kids to cycle to school this wouldn't be a problem. More should be made of this.

My 5-year-old is in A&E at this very moment, as a result of an injury sustained whilst cycling home from school.

That said, I highly suspect that the incident was caused by an attempt to show off, probably trying to ride no-hands, no-feet along the towpath, so it's more a reflection on my daughter's attitude to risk than on the safety of kids' cycling in general...

True true. But I don't see many 5 yr olds on Upper Richmond Road (or any of the main roads in London) and thats not because they're being protected from their own tendency to show off. Not all school runs need to use busy main roads of course, but many do.

People work further and need to drive to work, while dropping kids off on the school run. Travel in London is a nightmare so having to wait for the kids to ride to to school and then set off for work (what do you do with their bikes) is also a nightmare.

Ms DDD doesn't cycle if she take Sproket to school it won't be by bike, if it is he'll be with her on the pavement/cycle path through a park.

The roads are for adults even as a youngin I wasn't too sure about riding on the road until I was about 15. Even then I hopped between pavement and road.

There are many reasons why kids don't ride to school along with the roads aren't safe.

15 seems a bit late to start cycling on the roads. Don't forget that in one year you're allowed to ride a 50cc motorbike and a year later than that you're allowed to drive a car. Any road legal car. From Fiesta to Ferrari. I think this should be changed along the lines of the motorbike licences.

I have always ridden on the road. The roads are now busier than when I was a kid, but I think its wrong to say that sensible kids shouldn't ride on the road. All traffic should be aware that vunerable road users exist and they should all be aware of them. If you are used to being on the road as a kid and how vunerable you are to traffic, you are much more likely to be aware of cyclists when you get behind the wheel.

DonDaddyD

Ms DDD doesn't ride a bike because it isn't for her. I've tried, it ended up in an argument in the shop with the shop assistant in the middle holding a shopper. One day, maybe.

I started riding to school when I was old enough that my parents couldn't really say no. We had one teacher (a c*nt who I would happily meet with a David Haye special) who could take you out and teach you cycling proficency and he simply wouldn't.

I was always a brilliant cyclist but I became spectacular when I learned how to drive because through learning how to drive and passing my test, I learned the importance of giving signals, road positioning, anticipation and anticpating other road users movements. If a cycling proficency was offered to all cyclists (or even madatory should the 12yr old want to ride on the road) then I would be happy to let my teenage son ride a bike on the road as long as they passed and could prove that they understood the rules of the road.

If you think about it, it's almost unthinkable that we allow people with no formal training or prior knowledge of how the british road system works to use the roads freely. The only reason we do is because the lack of damage a bike can cause in relation to larger vehicles and it's too hard to regulate.

walkingbootweather

All done.

I for one am largely encouraged by the enthusiasm of MPs and Ministers at the debate. Lets see if all that talking results in action.

velohutts

A quick note on one of the topics , whoever suggested the improved manhole covers has done some research as a quick win on there part - the motorcycle action group have been campaigning for this for some time - basicaly the product used to make it is alot less slippery when wet than what they use now !!

Basic but a good idea across the board.

rjsterry

velohutts wrote:

A quick note on one of the topics , whoever suggested the improved manhole covers has done some research as a quick win on there part - the motorcycle action group have been campaigning for this for some time - basicaly the product used to make it is alot less slippery when wet than what they use now !!

Basic but a good idea across the board.

If they could do something similar with line markings that would be brilliant. When it's greasy like this morning, there may as well be double red tram rails along the gutter.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

There are many reasons why kids don't ride to school along with the roads aren't safe.

And those reasons are mostly specific to this country.

EKE_38BPM

rjsterry wrote:

velohutts wrote:

A quick note on one of the topics , whoever suggested the improved manhole covers has done some research as a quick win on there part - the motorcycle action group have been campaigning for this for some time - basicaly the product used to make it is alot less slippery when wet than what they use now !!

Basic but a good idea across the board.

If they could do something similar with line markings that would be brilliant. When it's greasy like this morning, there may as well be double red tram rails along the gutter.

Road markings are notoriously slippery when wet. Parking restriction lines are so far in the gutter that they shouldn't be much of a factor though.

nation

velohutts wrote:

A quick note on one of the topics , whoever suggested the improved manhole covers has done some research as a quick win on there part - the motorcycle action group have been campaigning for this for some time - basicaly the product used to make it is alot less slippery when wet than what they use now !!

Basic but a good idea across the board.

Topical too, since a lot of the replacements they're pushing (usually made of some kind of composite material, with a shellgrip-style coating on the top) are simultaneously cheaper than the usual cast iron affairs and less likely to be stolen by dodgy scrap metal merchants.

rjsterry

EKE_38BPM wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

velohutts wrote:

A quick note on one of the topics , whoever suggested the improved manhole covers has done some research as a quick win on there part - the motorcycle action group have been campaigning for this for some time - basicaly the product used to make it is alot less slippery when wet than what they use now !!

Basic but a good idea across the board.

If they could do something similar with line markings that would be brilliant. When it's greasy like this morning, there may as well be double red tram rails along the gutter.

Road markings are notoriously slippery when wet. Parking restriction lines are so far in the gutter that they shouldn't be much of a factor though.

They're quite far out on bits of my route, in places roughly central to the, err, cycle lane :roll:

EKE_38BPM

There are regulations on how far out, how wide etc the lines should be in order to be legal. If they don't conform, they can be flouted and any tickets/penalties appealed and thrown out.
If they are as far out as you suggest, complain and get them either removed or repainted in the right place.