Why the unfairness to the cycle path?

abdul12

As you can see I have taken this sample photo (A312 section) to emphasize the cycle path and dual carriageway (legal to ride with max 50mph as far as I have seen).

I have ridden using both paths: the cycle path and the dual carriageway. Personally I prefer dual carriageway opposed to the other for the following reasons:

1. Cycle path is broken and bumpy for road bike.
2. Average speed is too slow 13-14mph for the reason above.
3. Cycle path is,not maintained.
4. Shards of glasses and pointy material on cycle path which risk puncture on long distance rides.
5. A dangerous descent since slip road connects with cycle path.

The other relative sample is cycle paths on Uxbridge Road as well (example of one of many samples).

My questions:

1. Why are cycle paths not as smooth as regular roads?
2. Why are cycle paths not maintained and cleaned?
3. Why are some cycle paths dangerously stupid such as the descent I mentioned?

Of course some points to be noted:

1.I can cycle faster on dual carriageway.
2.Provide direct route to my work (from hayes to pinner)
3.I reached heston from hayes in 35 min approx which would have taken 45 min on cycle path (example)
4.I don't mind traffic stops as that is compensated by the fact I can travel faster on smooth surface compared to the poor cycle paths.
5.Safety to some extent is compromised but high visilibility reduces that. Plus I have some safety knowledge on roads (others may have as well).

My choice would be the dual carriageway based on my analysis on both routes provided you have adequate safety training of course.

NB: if cycle paths were smooth and maintained they would be as fast as riding on dual carriageways which is sadly not in most cases. Also cycle paths just have too many turns if you know what I mean. On dual carriageway you have to go straight with minimal turning and you can pedal continuously.

Long_Time_Lurker

Cyclelanes aren't as well maintained because cycle paths don't carry the bulk of transport/workers/goods and services to their destination. Lack of cyclepaths won't bring the economy to a halt. Lack of roads will.
So governments prioritise spending accordingly.

By deciding to take the dual carriageway, you are riding on something that has been designed for transport driving at high-speed.
For a ride that short, I would rather take the 10 minute hit to my time and use a tyre that provides better punture protection. I consider personal safety to be more important than time.
You also fail to mention that the sides of most dual carriageways are awash with broken glass, sand and grit - that is dangerous too, unless you want to take the central position on one of the lanes. I can't see that working out too well.

macleod113

I tend to take the dual carriageway but only as long as I feel safe. in bad weather or a heavy traffic day I would consider the cycle path.
the main reason as already mentioned is the poor maintenance of the surface, stones, glass, lumps, bumbs, railings, posts, lights all make it fun not to mention pedestrians and cyclists coming the other way.
I understand the council's priorities and know it wont change any time soon. I just don't do anything silly. I don't ride in the gutter but neither do I take up half a lane.

chris_bass

it really depends on the dual carriageway, i often have to cycle on a dual carriageway for part of my journey and i think it is probably the safest part, it is a wide road, easily enough room for bike, car, car all at the same time and so i find the drivers give me more room, when i then move onto the single carriageway roads cars have to squeeze past. I feel the cycle paths round here are at best a token gesture and avoid them where possible due to similar reasons to you.

abdul12

Thanks for the comments. I have noted some following points:

1. Failed to mention that hard shoulder has puncture risks: yes I did but I didn't ignore the fact myself. I ride near the edge of white line. The benefit opposed to single carriageway, if I have observed correctly, is that drivers tend to give safe space for cycling. On single carriageway drivers try their best to overtake cyclists if there is opposing traffic which results in dangerous overtakes (just my hypothesis and as mentioned by Chris).

2. In bad weather its safer to use cycle paths: I would agree on this part. Suppose you slip off and have toe clips on cycle. It more likely you are going slide under a car or God-forbid a HGV. I suppose having good rain tyres (and high visibility clothing/lights) and/or reducing speed can eliminate that risk (by Mac).

3 Short rides: I agree cycle paths should be used if just 10 minutes. But here I am emphasizing long rides say from hayes to Ashford where the best direct route is through the dual carriageway (by Long lime).

trekker12

Cycle paths aren't (in my opinion) designed for the likes of you or I. A typical urban cyclepath is not designed for me to get to work quickly. It's designed for people to get to work safely in the opinion of the traffic system designer - who may not even ride a bike and is working to a compromise like all design.

On my commuter bike - set up for getting me to work quickly I would use the dual carriageway. If out on a Sunday morning with my wife and had kids in tow (I don't have children but imagine that to be the case) then I wouldn't dream of riding down a dual carriageway. The cycle path has been designed with greater consideration to the family than to my need to get to work ten minutes earlier.

cookeeemonster

99.9% of cycle paths are designed so as not to inconvience motorised transport and (if they can be bothered to consider them) pedestrains. Thats why they force you to give way everywhere, are bumpy, have zero maintainance and are far, far slower to use than normal roads. They seem to be designed by box tickers who dont expect them to be actually used.

Not sure what I'd do in your situation as it depends on the road but I sympathise myself...I use a not great cyclepath alongside a 50mph dual carriageway myself - in this instance the few cyclists I see using it (almost all this year) are batsh*t mental as the road is really not suited to cycling unfortunately.

Long_Time_Lurker

I should have mentioned that I commute on an MTB. The bumps and potholes aren't something that I consider when planning my route.

fatsmoker

CookeeeMonster wrote:

batsh*t mental .

Must try to use that in conversation today.

thistle_

abdul12 wrote:

Also cycle paths just have too many turns if you know what I mean. On dual carriageway you have to go straight with minimal turning and you can pedal continuously.[/b]

There was an existing cycle route near me which went under a bridge. A housing development was built and the council demolished the bridge, filled in the railway cutting to create a ramp and cyclists have to cross the road now.
On one side the ramp (about 1:20) comes up to the footway on the road, makes a sharp 90 degree turn, to dogleg across the road.

I asked the council why they have done this and not just provided a straight crossing over the road and their reply was that cyclists need to be slowed down which is why the tight turns were put in :shock:

markhewitt1978

In the Netherlands the cycle routes are more often a better surface than the road and a more direct route. Whereas in the UK they are built the same as pedestrian paths, rough and give way to everything.

It has to be remembered of course that roads are often debris free because the motor traffic sweeps them clean.

surrey_commuter

a good question... i have a choice of CS3 and The Highway. The lanes on the Highway are very narrow and a lot of tipper trucks use it therefore I join the lunatics on CS3 where the chance of an accident are far higher but unlikely to be fatal.

cookeeemonster

Surrey Commuter wrote:

a good question... i have a choice of CS3 and The Highway. The lanes on the Highway are very narrow and a lot of tipper trucks use it therefore I join the lunatics on CS3 where the chance of an accident are far higher but unlikely to be fatal.

+1

Highway is a nightmare, I only use it on my Vespa and its bad enough then. CS3 is ok for most of the year until the sun comes out..I travel the opposite direction to you I'm guessing and only use it on my current commute when I want to take a slower, scenic route...but yeah, you need to watch out