 sj |
||
|
||
BS: On your bike
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Mrrzy Date: 27 Aug 22 - 09:49 PM This last trip to Cambridge (Mass. US), I kept thinking there were lines of cars waiting for lights, but never moving... Turns out they have put the bike lanes between the parked cars and the sidewalks. Thus bikes are not next to moving cars, and drivers do not open car doors into bike lanes. Brill, I thought. Excellent markings at intersections. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: DaveRo Date: 27 Aug 22 - 03:09 PM MaJoC the Filk wrote: ...pedestrians hog the cycle lane);In my town in Kent, cycle lanes are only carved out of pavements, not roads. But the council doesn't maintain the combined cycle/pedestrian path at the full width: the pedestrian side is always furthest from the road and the hedges are not cut back. So we pedestrians have to walk on the bicycle side, and get abused by cyclists for doing so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 27 Aug 22 - 02:44 PM > special cycle lanes Hear, Hear. The English approach to producing cycle lanes in towns appears (from bitter experience with the result) to be "let's use paint on the existing road or pavement" for cheapness, with two effects: * Car space gets squeezed, and cars inevitably encroach on cycle space (resp, pedestrians hog the cycle lane); * Cycle lanes tend to disappear just when they would be most useful ("we've done the easy bit for you --- now you're on your own, sunshine"). An especially gratuitous example of the latter appears in Station Road in Witney. For most of its length, the cycle lane is on the pavement, but there's a short and narrow flat bridge (a leftover from the railways). At this point, rather than widen the bridge, the cycle lane abruptly jinks sideways into the road for several yards, with no obvious warning to the car traffic. Cyclists have a straight choice between illegally using the pavement, and courting suicide by inattentive driver (who may not wish to play chicken with cars coming the other way). We now return you to your normal programming. Apologies for the rant: that head of steam's been building up for a decade. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Backwoodsman Date: 27 Aug 22 - 02:17 PM Mrs Backwoodsperson spends a fair bit of time working in The Netherlands. She’s a big admirer of their way of handling the considerable amount of cycle-traffic, and believes an investment in this country in their system would do much to improve the situation for all road and footpath users. I do agree with Steve that it’s a minority of inconsiderate, reckless cyclists who give the majority of good, sensible cyclists a bad name. Very much the same way that a minority of dog-owners who don’t pick their dog’s shit up and dispose of it properly give the vast majority who, like me, are fastidious about clearing up after their dogs, a bad name. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Senoufou Date: 27 Aug 22 - 12:51 PM Having looked it up, I realise I meant 'mankini', not 'tankini'. And Steve, why not try one of those eh? Nice and cool in this rather hot weather. Actually, I think the best solution to protect cyclists and also pedestrians etc is to have special cycle lanes along each road. I think they have these in Holland? No other vehicle would be allowed on them, and thus cars/cyclists would be separated for their own safety. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Aug 22 - 12:22 PM Well I don't need Lycra to stand out and get me all sweaty, thanks. I have a day-glo yellow helmet that does the standing-out for me. In the old days I had a Sam Browne belt in fluorescent yellow. For anything other than short hops I have some nice, loose cycling shorts with a chamois insert. At one time I used to buy shorts made by Bellwether, but I haven't seen them for sale for years. I'm thinking of getting a Brooks B17 saddle. For years I wouldn't settle for anything less. As I like to walk normally upon dismounting I've never had cleats, preferring toe clips with adjustable straps. Can't do either on a Brompton, it seems, but I'm sure I'll adapt. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 27 Aug 22 - 11:10 AM > And ditch the Lycra. Lycra's functional: it says "here's someone who doesn't want to blend into the background". Vastly better than das blinkenlights some cyclists insist on using during the day, which have the "look at me! look at me!" nature; they don't so much attract attention as insist on monopolising it. I get distracted by them, even as a pedestrian. End of rant. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Aug 22 - 09:52 AM As for wobbling, an experienced cyclist can launch off with minimal wobble. If you're prone to wobbling on takeoff, you should refrain from cycling in traffic until you've practised and gained confidence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Aug 22 - 07:43 AM Just don't cycle through red lights. It's against the law and it gives cyclists a bad name, and there are aggressive motorists watching. Get off your bike and push it across the junction pedestrian-style if you're that desperate. And ditch the Lycra. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Backwoodsman Date: 27 Aug 22 - 07:41 AM Stanron, could you point us to the section in the Highway Code where it says that cyclists may disregard red traffic lights when they judge it to be in their own best interests to do so and sod other road-users and pedestrians, please? I’ve searched my copy but I’ve been unable to find that piece. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: DaveRo Date: 27 Aug 22 - 07:29 AM Stanron wrote: Finally, if a cyclist can see that there are no oncoming cars, or pedestrians crossing, then it is perfectly safe to go through the red light...That might be true if there are no pedestrians anywhere near, who might cross the road unexpectedly - or just walk on it for a few metres to get round something on the pavement. That includes pedestrians the cyclist cannot see - they might be out of his sight. Pedestrians should be able to assume that all vehicles stop at red lights. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 27 Aug 22 - 06:32 AM There used to be a traffic-safety poster around in England, showing a child on a cycle; the child wore a T-shirt with "WARNING: soft vehicle" on the back. Sadly, said child was standing on the pedals, which guarantees that the bike will wobble dangerously: completely the wrong message for the cyclists, but mebbe the right one for the motorist. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Stanron Date: 27 Aug 22 - 06:18 AM Cyclists are unique in the transport world by being unstable at zero or low speeds. Stability is only achieved by adjusting weight position and direction. The faster you go, the more stable you become but at very low speeds a cyclist has to wobble from one side to side to another until stability from speed is achieved. Sat at red lights, with a car dangerously close, the cyclist has three options for when the lights turn to green. First, start and risk bumping into the car, second wait until the car has gone and risk not moving at all if a long queue of cars is behind the first car, and third, move as far forward as possible so that when the lights change he or she can start and get to a stable speed before the car overtakes. The third option is by far the most sensible. Apart from the stability issue there are two added bonuses. Fist, the driver of car that was alongside can now actually see the cyclist and be knowingly responsible for safety when passing. Second, the cyclist is able to see, which the motorist is not, whether there is any traffic coming in either direction. Finally, if a cyclist can see that there are no oncoming cars, or pedestrians crossing, then it is perfectly safe to go through the red light. OK it is annoying to the motorists. who can't see what the cyclist can see. They have to wait. The cyclist has to think of their own safety first because there is no guarantee that motorists will. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Aug 22 - 04:43 AM It's amazing how cyclists are excoriated by car drivers, especially when you consider that cyclists are not emitting poisonous fumes or deadly particulates and are not refuelling with fossil fuel. Well I cycled through heavy rush-hour traffic, including many a jam, and I weaved in and out cautiously. I never jumped a red light or rode on the pavement (or wore Lycra) and if I felt it too dangerous I'd get off and push my bike across busy crossroads. A bike at the front of a queue at traffic lights can easily outrun a car across a junction when the lights change, so no cause of hold-ups there. Things must have changed since the mid-90s, because in thousands of miles of cycling in London I was never once shouted at or threatened by a motorist. Cyclists are, arguably, far more virtuous road-users than car drivers. The sense of entitlement displayed by so many of the latter is staggering. There may be a few bad cyclists, but come and drive around Bude in the holiday season and I'll show you a damn sight more bad motorists. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Manitas_at_home Date: 27 Aug 22 - 03:40 AM Just think how much longer that line would be if they rode in single file. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Senoufou Date: 27 Aug 22 - 02:45 AM There has been much discussion recently about the possibility of cyclists having to display registration numbers, to pay Road Tax, Insurance etc. This is in order to monitor their transgressions (cycling gaily through red lights, whizzing along on the pavements and so on.) I don't much mind if they wear Lycra, fur coats or tankinis (!) but when driving my Fiesta I'm very wary of safeguarding them when overtaking a long line of the idiots, two abreast, wobbling about in the middle of a lane etc. So many times they totally ignore traffic lights, and it's so dangerous. I used to love my robust, trundly Raleigh bike when I was in my early teens. I called it 'Lucky'. It had a shamrock logo on the bell, and we children used to whizz about everywhere. But there were no cars on the roads then - I knew no family who owned a car! (early Fifties). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Aug 22 - 06:34 PM I hesitate to open ancient and neglected threads (I don't want Jeri telling me off...), but this one has just the right title... Until the mid-90s I was a rabid cyclist. For years I'd cycled to work every day, to start with a seven-mile ride (each way!) through Epping Forest followed by a hairy stretch of the North Circular to Walthamstow. More latterly, from Widemouth Bay to Holsworthy, 22 miles and 1400 feet of climbing every day in all weathers. In 1993 I cycled 6000 miles. All that stopped abruptly in late 1994 when I sustained a knee injury. I still have my hybrid bike (now 33 years old) and can do gentle rides on trails that aren't too hilly. I'm now 70+ and my knee and my back are nothing to write home about (I've had surgery on both). Mrs Steve has been just as keen a cyclist and she also has knee trouble. So we've bitten the bullet. Having not spent money on holidays for three years, we've bought electric bikes. Folding ones. Bromptons. I can get them both in the boot of my Focus without letting the seats down. It's fun learning to fold and unfold them, but we're getting good... So far we've just had a couple of runs. Here are some observations that blew my anti-electric sentiment out of the water. First, you can set the level of assist, or not have it at all. Second, the assist kicks in only after you've pedalled a couple of turns. Thirdly, this is not a motor bike. You don't pedal, you don't get the assist. Fourth, once you get up to 15 mph, there's no more assist (you don't need it!). Now here's the biggie for those with bad knees: the most important part of the assist comes when you launch off and try to get going, or when you need to speed up, or pedal up a hill. That's what puts strain on the knees and that's what the electric bike wipes out. Your knees are looked after. I'm a total convert and as an ould chap I'm going to be out there riding a bike again - and getting exercise (you don't get away without getting that!) The bikes were expensive (I've insured them) and the last thing I want to do is show off. We used the money we haven't been spending on holidays. But they are going to be just the ticket for us to carry on getting out and about without sitting in a tin overcoat all the time. And I never wear Lycra... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 27 Apr 17 - 01:07 AM Britain is taking action, pouring £1.2bn ($1.54, €1.42) into "cycling and walking" by 2020/21 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2017/apr/26/the-government-just-announced-a-gamechanger-for-cycling-in-england?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 26 Apr 17 - 06:14 PM Tut, tut, he shouldn't be reading his paper while in control of a vehicle. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: punkfolkrocker Date: 26 Apr 17 - 12:45 PM so would a fit 25 year old emit more co2 cycling fast [roads / rugged terrain] or having a vigorous shag / wank... what if combining the activities.. solo / tandem...??? 😜 Maybe then calculate and compare emission for the same activities performed by the over 70s... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: FreddyHeadey Date: 26 Apr 17 - 12:35 PM CO2 Raggytash, You'll need to read the articles yourself to decide just how skewed and substantiated are the figures and " if the same criteria had been used ". They are ballparky enough for me to find them believable though. From links in thread.cfm?threadid=161931&messages=131#3852444 Human cycling.... "Kilograms of CO2 exhaled per minute = (1.98 g/L x 3.12 L) x 0.001 kg = 0.0062 kg" ... " A 30 minute commute will then involve 0.186 kg of expired CO2, " http://cozybeehive.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/how-much-co2-do-you-exhale-while.html This blog calculated human at rest as "900g/day" so say 15g in 30 minutes https://www.globe.gov/explore-science/scientists-blog/archived-posts/sciblog/index.html_p=183.html (changing the google search to ......Cars) "In 2014, the average combined CO2 emissions for a new light vehicle sold in Australia was 188 grams per kilometre (g/km)." so say 1,500 for 8km(5 miles) http://www.greenvehicleguide.gov.au/pages/Information/VehicleEmissions ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ So for a 5mile/8km commute that's 186g,( let's say 200g) v 1,500g ( + 15g for the driver sitting in his car then reading the paper waiting for the cyclist to catch him up.) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For the buggers riding their bike for fun, yes, they are adding ~330g co2 per hour. Could someone please check my maths. I must say I struggle to see where that 330g is coming from, it seems a heck of a weight. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 26 Apr 17 - 08:46 AM If a car emits x amount of CO2 to cover a given distance does a cyclist emit the same amount of CO2, less CO2 or more CO2 to cover the same distance. In order to give any credence to the first figure we need to know the answer to the second part. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: punkfolkrocker Date: 26 Apr 17 - 08:39 AM all this theorizing about breathing reminds me... about 15 years ago I was out on my bike cycling lanes surrounded by farmland, when I suddenly developed a severe allergic reaction that knocked the stuffing out of me. I was housebound and ill for days... So long ago i can't remember the symptoms or duration of illness... What was that then... crop spraying...??? pollen...??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: FreddyHeadey Date: 26 Apr 17 - 08:23 AM Raggytash. Yes, me too about " cynicism when faced with unsupported figures like this".* But that's why I'm asking what you picture in your own head. Can you describe it? *though I'm not sure how 'unsupported' they are and I would have thought that amongst those google links might be some unbiased university based calculations and I think I would trust them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 26 Apr 17 - 08:03 AM Freddy, When I read that using a car creating X times CO2 for a given journey I wondered if the same criteria had been used to measure the CO2 emitted by a cyclist. Forgive me but I tend towards cynicism when faced with unsupported figures like this. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: FreddyHeadey Date: 26 Apr 17 - 06:42 AM I can't quite get my head round what you are picturing Raggytash. Do you picture moving one bicycle plus one person(~80kg?) five miles creates only slightly less CO2 than moving one car plus one person(~800kg?) five miles? I'm picturing it as burning about four digestive biscuits(200kcal) v 0.3 litres of petrol(3,000kcal) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Senoufou Date: 26 Apr 17 - 06:35 AM By the way, far from 'enjoying the lovely weather', we've just had golf-ball sized hailstones thundering down from above. I was worried they'd damage my car and the conservatory roof. The noise was like an automatic machine gun. I couldn't imagine being on a bike in that; one would be covered in bruises! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Senoufou Date: 26 Apr 17 - 05:53 AM Well, I do toddle round Norfolk's lanes and byways on foot, in the summer. I adore the countryside, the fresh air and all the wildlife. One doesn't enjoy any of that from inside a car. When my husband and I went to that gym a few years ago, we did the hard work bit, but always ended up in the steam room, followed by the sauna and ending up in the boiling hot jaccuzzi. (We both need lots of heat) I must say, we might not have improved our muscle tone all that much, but we always came home very, very clean! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 26 Apr 17 - 05:36 AM That sounds lovely, Senoufou (sorry, I've been spelling your nick Senofou!) Though it's even lovelier when you're out in God's good air and looking at the fields and houses and flowers and vegetable gardens and watching the flow of the river. If you're as lucky as me, you'll have a river not far off with a riverside path where you can cycle safely away from cars and trucks and fumes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Senoufou Date: 26 Apr 17 - 04:38 AM Poor Thompson, I don't think you should have to be justifying blooming breathing! You can breathe heavily if you want or need to. Surely saving the planet doesn't involve trying not to breathe too much!!! Re the eating butter not being bad for us after all, all I can say to that is......YIPPPPPPEEEEEEEEE!!!!! I must be in the Guinness Book of Records for the person who consumes the most cholesterol on Earth. (As most people on here probably know, I adore butter, cream, full milk and cheese) My general health is quite good for my age, and I would never accept that these good foods are harmful. What isn't good for one's health is processed stuff, additives, too much sugar an not enough fruit and veg. Thanks to your thread, Thompson, I'm considering getting my husband and me joint gym membership. He's very keen on sport, and I could go on the exercise bikes and the rowing machine, and gently swim in the pool etc.We used to go a few years back, and it might do us good to try again, I'll speak to him when he gets back from Ivory Coast. You've encouraged me, so thank you! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 26 Apr 17 - 04:19 AM Depends on the cyclist. In my usual daily cycle, I'm not panting or heaving big breaths; I'm sailing along breathing in the good air (I avoid car-heavy roads) as I sit and pedal gently. Occasionally, being a wimp, I have to get off and wheel my bike up a hill; mostly I can get up hills by using lower gears, though, and it doesn't require any great deep lungsful of air. In fact, the only difference in my breathing when I cycle is that it is probably closer to meditation breathing. By the way, the latest news is that we were all wasting out time avoiding butter and pizza (assuming we were eating healthily generally and taking exercise) https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/cutting-saturated-fat-does-not-reduce-heart-disease-experts-say-1.3061769 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 26 Apr 17 - 04:07 AM Not so Thompson, the person in the car is sedentary, no exertion required, the person on the bike is taking exercise and I would have thought breathing heavily and faster. There must therefore be an increase in the amount of CO2 exhaled. I am always cautious of figures that make such claims as "saves half a ton of CO2 a year - which is 5% of the average person's carbon footprint" Frequently such figures are skewed to strengthen a particular argument. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Mr Red Date: 26 Apr 17 - 03:59 AM or the drop in CO2 from that used by a car and its single occupant (even if he doesn't smoke). And the CO2 emitted making the car v the bike? e.g. there are those that think that manufacturing CO2 is significant relative to "scrapping & buying new eco-better cars" if you want precision, think of all the aspects. Of course, on a sample of millions, the cyclist is going to live longer and thus exhale more lifetime CO2 but on the plus side we exhale Oxygen as well, our lungs are not as efficient as the infernal combustion engine. Simple answers? Life ain'ta like that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 26 Apr 17 - 03:55 AM I don't know, Raggytash; I would imagine that someone cycling will breathe about as much as someone driving, though! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 26 Apr 17 - 03:24 AM That doesn't really answer my question Thompson, you put forward the statement: "By the way, a little figure for those here who might be green-ish - switching one person's commute of four miles (6.5km), which is the average length of a commute, from a car to a bicycle saves half a ton of CO2 a year - which is 5% of the average person's carbon footprint. Add in lots of cycling to the shops and to meet buddies in the cafe, etc, and you can really cut down that carbon use" Does this figure take into account the volume of CO2 emitted by a human being taking exercise on a cycle over the same distance, or is it merely the drop in CO2 used by a motor vehicle. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Mr Red Date: 26 Apr 17 - 03:24 AM what about the CO2 consumed by sitting in the car? 30 years ago my boss had a new car with an average speed computer display, and we drove from central London, which boasted an average of 11mph for cars. We did 6mph for the first hour! Which I am told is about what it is now! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 26 Apr 17 - 02:24 AM Raggytash asks Has anyone ever measured the volume of CO2 emitted by people exercising? Naturally, they have, Raggytash. There's been a couple of studies. In general, the finding is that sitting in a car in traffic is worse for your lungs than cycling past it - its one of the reasons that cyclists go to the front of traffic and wait in the bicycle box and take off instantly when the lights change. In my case, it's the reason why I'll usually find a way through quieter streets when possible. Benefits of cycling and walking 'outweigh air pollution risk' in cities https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/05/benefits-cycling-walking-outweigh-air-pollution-risk-cities Cyclists and fumes https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2014/feb/20/air-pollution-cyclists-bike-blog Cyclists exposed to five times less air pollution than those in cars, experiment suggests http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/cyclists-exposed-five-times-less-air-pollution-cars-experiment-suggests-133129#JoWRmJqpBJAspqdl.99 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Greg F. Date: 25 Apr 17 - 08:13 PM What about cattle? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: FreddyHeadey Date: 25 Apr 17 - 07:51 PM Has anyone ever measured the volume of CO2 emitted by people exercising? Oh yes! https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=volume+of+CO2+emitted+by+people+exercising Raggytash it'd be interesting to come back with figures for us Pedestrian Cyclist @ 8mph Cyclist @ 20mph Electric car Petrol car Diesel car Bus |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 25 Apr 17 - 05:56 PM Question for you Thompson....... seriously. If a person exercise they consume oxygen, they exhale Carbon Dioxide. Has anyone ever measured the volume of CO2 emitted by people exercising? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 25 Apr 17 - 04:29 PM Another study: driving to work is six times more expensive (for society - obviously way more expensive for individual) than cycling http://cycling.today/traveling-by-car-six-times-more-expensive-than-by-bicycle-study-finds/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 25 Apr 17 - 08:33 AM Bikers (motorcyclists) or cyclists? Very big difference in the speed and danger. In fact, a friend of mine who got one of those fancy e-bikes that can go up to 30km/h without any pedalling hit a patch of gravel and broke his wrist last summer. He's cycled all his life, at similar speeds, but when you're pedalling you know your speed and act according to it; just sitting still on an e-bike doesn't give you the same control. By the way, a little figure for those here who might be green-ish - switching one person's commute of four miles (6.5km), which is the average length of a commute, from a car to a bicycle saves half a ton of CO2 a year - which is 5% of the average person's carbon footprint. Add in lots of cycling to the shops and to meet buddies in the cafe, etc, and you can really cut down that carbon use. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: punkfolkrocker Date: 25 Apr 17 - 08:22 AM I taught a girlfriend to ride a bike when she was 18.. Despite falling off on tarmac and scraping and bruising her protruding bits, she was determined to conquer it, and learned successfully in one day... She was a very ambitious and motivated young woman [top A level and degree grades], and soon progressed to buying her own powerful fast motorbike.. Not for me, I've never risked getting on one because I wouldn't trust myself at such speeds, and I was working in an artificial limbs clinic with bikers my age.. ...Of course she eventually left me behind to meet and settle down with my much calmer mrs who is as undriven and laid back as me... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 25 Apr 17 - 08:20 AM Yeah, you mostly lean rather than turning the handlebars to turn, though there is a small turning action. If you fish around YouTube, there's a fascinating video by someone who got a mechanic to adjust the handlebars so they'd turn the opposite way. It took him at least a day, if memory serves, to be able to cycle like that. Then he had to relearn the normal way of cycling. What I wonder is, if he kept alternating them, would his mind automatically separate the two skills and use them at need, the way it does when you speak a few different languages. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: FreddyHeadey Date: 25 Apr 17 - 08:13 AM On a bike I thought I leaned in to the curve I wanted to make and the steering instinct followed. Is that wrong? Thanks for the prod. I'm going to have to clear the garage now and dust off my trouser clips. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Senoufou Date: 25 Apr 17 - 07:39 AM Hahaha Mr Red, this reminds me of when our eldest Siamese cat used to love riding in our large one-wheeled wheelbarrow. The garden was enormous in that house (nearly an acre), and he used to jump in and howl for me to propel him at breakneck speed around the entire place. What made everyone laugh was the way he sat upright and leaned in to the turns. He really understood the principle. I would be gasping for breath after fifteen minutes of this, but he always wanted more. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Mr Red Date: 25 Apr 17 - 07:10 AM Balanced view: the way we turn on a bike is counter-intuitive. That is, we actually give the bike a little counter-steering and the bike naturally falls to the other side - bingo we have lean. It is why learning is so difficult relative to your intuition. And watching racing motorcyclists gives a clue to counter-steering, they need to turn quickly. Mind you you have to see it on slo-mo. It is all to do with the position of the front axle relative to the line of the steering head joint. Have a look at regular bikes, then look at a mountain bike. The amount the axle is forward is less on the mountain bike because fast turns are needed and suspension dictates forces are fairly direct. But is harder to ride. Certainly to learn on. I was observing a girl learning recently and her kiddies bike was not conducive to her learning, the front axle was not far enough forward. And when she turned left she invariably fell over right, because she wasn't counter-steering, she was "I want to go left, I need to turn left". Simply put, because even those that study this can't fully explain it: the front wheel contact point with the ground (relative to the line of the headstock) is modified by turning the handlebars which tends to cause lean. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Jim Carroll Date: 25 Apr 17 - 05:25 AM "I frequently see pedestrians plugged into a squawk box while walking along narrow rural roads. " Somewhat different problem Iains Listening to music does not impair your ability to walk and, as any sensible walker knows, you should face the traffic and rely on your vision, not your hearing when road walking You might as well address your question to people with hearing problems. Any careless act committed by anybody gives no right to motorists to do anything other than obey the rules of the road. I ha'e ma doots about the sanity of those are unable to go through life without the accompaniment of ethereal voices in their ear, but that's something else altogether. I don't believe it is a question of "Hive Minds" T It's alwas an aggressively thoughtless minority who spoil it for the few. The worrying point is when people start justifying the minority by pointing at the minority of motorists who do stupid things Two idiots don't make a genius Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 25 Apr 17 - 04:24 AM So have you taken to the bike yet, Leenia? Anyone else? Enjoying the lovely weather? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Greg F. Date: 24 Apr 17 - 06:16 PM Unfortunately, there are also gobshites who imagine that all drivers are part of a hive mind, and what one does represents what all do. This is not so. Quite. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 24 Apr 17 - 05:39 PM There are cyclists who are gobshites. There are drivers who are gobshites. Unfortunately, there are also gobshites who imagine that all cyclists are part of a hive mind, and what one does represents what all do. This is not so. Each human being is an individual, whose behaviour belongs to himself or herself, and is not attached to any others who may use the same mode of transport. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Bonzo3legs Date: 24 Apr 17 - 02:46 PM Whilst driving to my wife's hospital bedside this afternoon, I was overtaken by a hyper-lycra fool on a bike who must have been travelling in excess of 40mph - downhill. Unfortunately I was not running my iphone video at the time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Dave the Gnome Date: 24 Apr 17 - 02:16 PM 100! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Iains Date: 24 Apr 17 - 01:45 PM I frequently see pedestrians plugged into a squawk box while walking along narrow rural roads. Some cyclists also indulge in the same habit. Do they not deserve to be taken out of their stupidity by a driver? Surely it is not unreasonable to expect all road users to be alert to other traffic and act accordingly? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 24 Apr 17 - 10:47 AM Someone crossing the road stupidly is as potentially lethal as the driver of an artic. Jesus, don't tell Daesh! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: punkfolkrocker Date: 24 Apr 17 - 10:07 AM Here's an obvious thought to start the day.."most people these days are inconsiderate arseholes..." Of course.. I'm a rare decent reasonable bloke... and so are all you mudcatters... As a cyclist.. I consider too many other cyclists to be complete knobheads.. ..and too many motorists are arrogant bell ends out there potentially to maim and kill us... Thankfully I and, other mudcatters, believe in patience, respect and tolerance for other road users.... 😇 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Bonzo3legs Date: 24 Apr 17 - 10:04 AM "Has anybody encountered this weird phenomenon of cyclists using mobile phones yet?" frequently, and have sent video to local safer neighbourhood team (police),as I have of cyclists/moped riders doing wheelies !! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Will Fly Date: 24 Apr 17 - 09:45 AM I'm a motorist, a cyclist and a pedestrian (less of a cyclist these days for various reasons) and don't support any particular camp. But I will share one interesting experience that occurred some years ago, on a path that runs along the Sussex coast from Shoreham Beach to Lancing. You can see the stretch of coast on this Google map, to the south of the Widewater Lagoon: Shoreham Beach The path is shared by walkers and cyclists. Just by the Lancing Sailing Club the path narrows, with railings on either side, and notices at both ends of the railings which say, in large letters: "CYCLISTS, PLEASE DISMOUNT." Having got thoroughly fed up one day with being bulldozed out of the way, I stopped and stood by the beginning of the railings and counted the cyclists up to a 100 - noting how many dismounted and walked through. The number of those who dismounted? None. Zero. Zilch. Nada. 0%. Out of curiosity I waved one down and asked him politely why, having obviously seen the sign, he refused to obey it. He mumbled something about it not mattering. When asked why, he just started pedalling onwards. Fun, innit? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 17 - 09:39 AM Has anybody encountered this weird phenomenon of cyclists using mobile phones yet? Last time I witnessed it was by a cyclist riding up the centre of the pavement on Dublin's extremely busy O'Connell Street. And I still have pangs of guilt over taking my girlfriend for a ride on my crossbar The innocence of youth eh!!!! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: FreddyHeadey Date: 24 Apr 17 - 09:39 AM I'm really not sure about bells. On cars you are only supposed to use the horn in emergencies. If I'm walking on a shared path I appreciate a subtle dingding from twenty-five yards away but I don't want a clang clang from two yards behind me. They can slow down to my pace and ask politely if they may pass. I know that as a youth I felt pretty nimble on a bike and felt quite capable of weaving round slow moving pedestrians. But I didn't realise how intimidating it can feel to a pedestrian. I never hit anyone but that doesn't prove that it was OK. Same in traffic, commuting through London was quite fun. Now, driving more, the odd cyclist nipping past in slow traffic is a bit of a shock ... but afterwards I feel envious :-( |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Hrothgar Date: 24 Apr 17 - 09:13 AM Nothing said yet about the danger that inconsiderate bike riders pose to pedestrians on shared paths - I get the impression that (a) none of them have a bell or one of those trendy electronic beepers or (b) that they don't know how to use it. ... and don't start me on cyclists without operational head and tail lights. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Senoufou Date: 24 Apr 17 - 08:20 AM Thank you for the replies about knees and hip joints. I must say the Fustyweed Two (in their late eighties) have excellent posture and walk well. Our Churchwarden goes for long walks as well as bike rides (walking about 15 miles across fields is nothing to him) They're all excellent advertisements for cycling as beneficial to health. There's a small riding stable in our village, and as a rider of many years (before I got old, decrepit and a bit fat) I sometimes think I'd like to take it up again. They have a sturdy cob which might not object to having me on board! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 17 - 04:26 AM "whereas a cyclist being an eejit is just annoying." Thanks for making my poin perfectly T Some cyclists, (no names) appear to be completely impervious to the danger their stupid behaviour can cause If I swerve to avoid an idiot cyclist pulling out in front of me and injure somebody else in doing so do I have to arm wrestle somebody to decide who was to blame Driving, particularly in urban areas, is a communal activity, even pedestrians need to be aware of that fact - go solo and you're a mnace 0- even if you're only pushing a "harmless" pram Someone crossing the road stupidly is as potentially lethal as the driver of an artic. Sorry - I been cycling regularly since tramlines were the main hazard on the roads. Don't try and bluff a bluffer Jim Carrolll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Bonzo3legs Date: 24 Apr 17 - 04:11 AM "They could be cycling if they wanted to." Not when you are disabled, not when you live 10 minutes drive up hill from Croydon for 5 miles to start of North Downs - strange that you have to go up to get to a "Down"!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 24 Apr 17 - 03:20 AM The problem with these discussions is that they invariably polarise into interest groups, each one blaming the other, when in fact the blame lies equally on both sides Perhaps, but drivers' bad judgment is very dangerous for cyclists, whereas a cyclist being an eejit is just annoying. It's like Bion of Borysthenes's saying "Though boys throw stones at frogs in sport, yet the frogs do not die in sport but in earnest." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 17 - 02:58 AM "They could be cycling if they wanted to." Spoken like a true young townie Not when you live twenty miles from the nearest town and you are getting on in years you can't, and unfortunately bad driving/cycling is endemic The problem with these discussions is that they invariably polarise into interest groups, each one blaming the other, when in fact the blame lies equally on both sides Motorists have always been thoughtless as far as cyclists are concerned, mainly in misjudging distances and possible speeds and failing to use the mirror when turning left (in Britain) Groups of cyclists who like to chat to their mates when cycling along are becoming more and more deadly on winding country roads - especially when they travel in packs. My regular visits have made me more and more aware of the growing tendency towards aggressive selfishness of wannabe road-owners who disregard so many rules in order to 'shorten the road' (a Traveller saying), I cycled half my life for both work and pleasure, mainly in the town; now I drive out of necessity in a rural area and avoid doing so in the cities like the plague. Awareness of your own safety and that of others is the issue when getting from A to B Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Stanron Date: 24 Apr 17 - 02:02 AM Any cyclist knows this, non-cycling motorists choose to ignore it, but cyclists correct balance by deflecting forward momentum. The faster you go, the smaller the deflections need to be. The slower you go, the larger the deflections. The larger the wobbles from side to side. You rarely go slower than when you start up. If you start up at some traffic lights at the same time as a car that is six to twelve inches away from you, you are in extreme danger. If you wait until all the stopped cars have gone you may never get to start. Far better to get as far in front of the line of stopped cars as possible and wait there for the lights to change. Then, when the lights do change you have got your big wobbles over before the rest of the traffic comes past. Also in that position there can be no excuse for other road users not seeing you. It's so much safer. In that forward position it may also be possible to see if any traffic is coming from either side. If there is no such traffic, and there are no pedestrians either, getting across quickly is often the best bet. Yes motorists resent cyclists not waiting but they should console themselves knowing that they are sitting comfortably, listening to the Archers and out of the rain and snow. They could be cycling if they wanted to. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 24 Apr 17 - 12:29 AM All Mr Red's "ifs" can be answered by looking at the countries and cities where cycling has increasingly replaced driving: Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Groeningen, Oslo, etc. Frogs have not rained down on the populace. Bonzo3legs, registration plates are already installed on cars; I don't see them being used for catching many of the lights-breakers or mobile-phone-users. (In Ireland, phone using in cars is endemic, and very, very dangerous.) A few countries have tried registration plates, but all have abandoned it as a resource-gobbler (vast armies of civil servants to administer it) and useless. I'm with you on the bells, Mr Red - I have a loud bell on my good bike, and a modern bell on my functional bike. (For some reason, it's now impossible to buy a good loud steel bell of the kind you hear on Queen's I Want to Ride My Bicycle any more; the modern ones seem to be made of aluminium and give a faint, unsatisfying, buzzy ring once attached to handlebars, though they sound satisfyingly loud in the shop. I bought myself an old one, and it's loud, but it's more of a "Ting-Ting" than a "Brring-Brring", which is what I thought I was buying. Senofou, in relation to knees, ask your doctor. I would have thought that cycling would be much easier on the knees than any other exercises; however, I have a friend (in his forties but weighty) who has been told that he shouldn't cycle because his knees are crocked. But this may be the specific form of knee problem he has, which I think is due to some horrible disease that rots his cartilage. By the way, the three-cornered way your weight is distributed makes it relatively light on bottom, feet and wrists - though a long cycle (100km+) can be wearing on the wrists. Punkfolkrocker - mooching around online I see some references to recumbent or semi-recumbent (I'd prefer the semi - you sit up, but your legs are straight out rather than down) and arthritis. Again, I'd ask the doc. Semi-recumbents use your back muscles more than your stomach muscles, I vaguely remember. Here's a video of someone trying one for the first time. (My blood chills at the thought of arthritis stopping one cycling; my thumb has just started to do a nasty getting-stuck thing, solved by giving the joint a jerk to the left with the other hand, and when I crouch I sound like someone scrunching up bubble-wrap.) Cyclists and drivers and red lights: this RSA (Ireland's Road Safety Authority, not the most cyclist-friendly group!) study of 60 junctions found that just 1 in 8 cyclists went through red lights; it also found that nearly 1 in 10 cars had defective lights, 1 in 7 drivers misused fog lights - and 1 in 4 semi-articulated lorries did. A Kerry study which I can quote if you want found that 67% of lights-breaking was by cars. Various cities, including Paris, are making some red lights optional for cyclists. I'm absolutely with you on the burly youths who hurtle through lights because "Me! I'm more important! I can go!" - but there are many non-sociopath riders who will go through red lights cautiously if it is safe to do so; the same with one-way streets - a lot of cities allow cyclists to go contraflow down one-ways when it's safe. For a little entertainment - a TED talk by an Israeli IT student who takes kids from a reformatory out mountain biking. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: FreddyHeadey Date: 23 Apr 17 - 09:10 PM Senoufou what does frequent biking do for the hip and knee joints? Knees I don't get any arthritis problems. I did have a painful knee once, walking, but I wasn't cycling much. When I did more cycling my knees felt better(I was still walking the same amount, maybe 12miles every couple of Sundays) But I know other people who complain there knees hurt when they cycle. I think it depends on the saddle height being set well and good pedalling technique and use of gears. Hips... idk. Bottom .... you didn't ask but it can certainly be an issue. The fitter you get the more pressure you put on the pedals and the less pressure you put on your btm. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: punkfolkrocker Date: 23 Apr 17 - 02:18 PM .. and it was around that time I had 2 bikes stolen in one summer... Maybe Norm was supplying those so desperate enough with chain cutters... 😣 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: punkfolkrocker Date: 23 Apr 17 - 02:14 PM Errrmmm... there was just the slightest difference in emphasis behind Nasty Norm's enthusiasm for promoting cycling for the jobless victims of thatcherism... 🙄 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Iains Date: 23 Apr 17 - 01:53 PM How times change. Back in the days of the mad handbag Norman Tebbit suggested people got on their bikes and as a result he was castigated and pilloried for daring to suggest such a thing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Senoufou Date: 23 Apr 17 - 12:51 PM Just out of interest (I'm not an arthritis sufferer, thank goodness) what does frequent biking do for the hip and knee joints? Good things or bad? And one's back seems to be constantly bent forward. Is that a bit painful after a time? Apart from the Fustyweed ladies, our Churchwarden is quite elderly, and rides his bike all over the place. He told me it keeps his paunch away. He does have a very flat stomach, and is (like the Fustyweed Two) slim as a whippet. It must tone up the body, and improve circulation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Mr Red Date: 23 Apr 17 - 12:29 PM Re the video: I can see gym cycling and arousal - none of the aggro with car drivers, no rain, no potholes, and you can look at the other person safely. And all that sweat (aka pheromones). But if pumping legs gets you going, dancing would work, and looking at the opposite sex is obligatory. "Perpendicular expression of horizontal desire" as GBS put it. Ahem! Despite the amount of dancing I do - well let us just say I need more dancing! Or a younger body. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Bonzo3legs Date: 23 Apr 17 - 11:34 AM And his whore wife naturalemente! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Bonzo3legs Date: 23 Apr 17 - 11:32 AM My wife often reminds me that years ago in Argentina that cyclists were required to register and display a registration number on their bikes. Possibly one of Poovy Peron's little niceties which seems a good idea - then it's possible to catch these inconsiderate cyclists who ride dangerously! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Apr 17 - 09:53 AM "Actually, several studies have shown that cars go through traffic lights far more than cyclists. " Possibly because motorists outnumber them 1000 to one Would need to see percentages to make sense of that one Did you hear of the couple riding down the road on a tandem when dog ran out and threw a bucket of water over them? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: punkfolkrocker Date: 23 Apr 17 - 08:40 AM I was actually at my ultimate fitness and strength when I was 40 -> 50... Cycling played a very significant part of my daily fitness regime... Btw.. nearly 3 and a half decades ago, me and that girlfriend could fit quite comfortably and snugly in a single bed... We kept in touch and are now married... but now even a king sized double pine bed is straining & creaking under the combined girth & weight of us... 😬 It's probably getting on for 3 years since my arthritic feet and knees have kept me off my bike.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: punkfolkrocker Date: 23 Apr 17 - 08:24 AM When I was 24 it took only 7 minutes to cycle at top speed from Stokes Croft, where I lived in Bristol, across to the far side of Eastville Stadium, for regular tuesday evening 'visits' to a girlfriend who needed recreational breaks from studying for her finals... That was a powerful incentive that kept me slim, fit, and in prime condition..... 😎 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Senoufou Date: 23 Apr 17 - 07:33 AM Oooh Thompson, that video's the first thing I've seen that perhaps COULD persuade me to get a bike! Increase one's libido and become sexy eh? And lose weight? Hee hee, my husband would be highly delighted! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Mr Red Date: 23 Apr 17 - 06:46 AM Now here's a group of concepts. 1) if people cycled to work, they would live at least 1/3 of the distance from work, and probably less than that. If that wouldn't reduce traffic levels - you can call me irrational. 2) As with joggers, peoples' immune system would be constantly alert, thus improving health. 3) Never mind bus lanes, footpaths in cities would need widening. 4) the army of idiots that currently terrorise the roads would refuse to buy a bell let alone use it, and expect pedestrians to have eyes in the back of their heads. Try walking the canal towpaths and you will see it. 5) if it is cars that are being targeted, mobility scooters would be more numerous and the idiot army would cry foul if you criticised them for their irresponsibility. "But I'm disabled" is the cry, NO! clue's in the name "mobility" scooter. 6) electric bikes! speeds would rise, laws flouted. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 23 Apr 17 - 06:35 AM By the way, cycling, unlike driving, makes you not only sexy but smart! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 23 Apr 17 - 06:25 AM Actually, several studies have shown that cars go through traffic lights far more than cyclists. The reason that this appears not to be so when you're driving is probably that you see cyclists going past and going through. If you're cycling, and you're sitting at the lights as I normally do, you see a tailgating series of cars whizzing through just after the lights turn red. The drivers further back in the queue don't see these - but they're far more dangerous than the cyclists who go through. One study, which I can direct you to if you'd read it, found that all forms of transport are 'scofflaws', but cyclists less so than others; and when asked why they went through red lights, etc, when they did, drivers answered "to save time", but cyclists answered "it's safer". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 23 Apr 17 - 06:21 AM Had a go on a trike yesterday ................. ............ it did have a 1.8 litre VW engine attached Sorry Thompson !! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Apr 17 - 06:18 AM It's crazy to ride in mre than single files on country roads Much better to use your head abe leave enough gaps between riders to overtake in stages. As far as harangues against cyclists on the Irish media - it really is a two-sided coin Traffic lights in Dublin may as well not be there for all the notice taken of them by cyclists - a nightmare for pedestrians and drivers alike. If it continues the way it is heading, the authorities will be forced to set up compulsory traffic awareness courses for all road users and maybe even prevent some from using major roads It cannot go on the way it is. Country roads are just common sense and courtesy with not enough cyclists to make it a problem - yet Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 23 Apr 17 - 06:07 AM Good driver, FreddyHeadey. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: FreddyHeadey Date: 22 Apr 17 - 04:48 PM Here, if there was a car coming the other way I wouldn't try to overtake even one single file cyclist. Once the oncoming road was clear I'd be over in the right lane so they could be three or even four abreast. Look A bunch of 3 x4abreast would be much easier and safer to pass than a bunch of 12 in single file. Norwich Rd https://goo.gl/maps/f1okBmUAzUK2 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 22 Apr 17 - 12:17 PM Yeah, roads vary and needs in cycling tactics vary. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 22 Apr 17 - 08:41 AM That's the point I was trying to put across. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: FreddyHeadey Date: 22 Apr 17 - 08:34 AM For the record If I had to overtake a cyclists coming out of Fustyweed i'd prefer them single file group of 4 (?) max doing 10mph https://goo.gl/maps/owAq9yJBkjK2 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 22 Apr 17 - 07:38 AM Thanks I eventually found it on Google maps and went into street view, blinked and I missed it !! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: FreddyHeadey Date: 22 Apr 17 - 06:58 AM Map & photos round Fustyweed http://www.geograph.org.uk/gridref/TG0518 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 22 Apr 17 - 04:26 AM By the way, in Britain, according to the NHS, 16% of the national budget is spent on the public health impact of pollution. Direct costs of obesity to the country are £16b a year, and of air pollution more than £20bn. If people got out of their cars just for those journeys under 5km (20 minutes) this would have a huge beneficial effect on the national budget as well as the national health. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Senoufou Date: 22 Apr 17 - 04:26 AM It is a funny name isn't it raggytash? And they're always getting their village sign nicked by tourists, as a souvenir. It's now cemented firmly in place! The name is thought to come from 'fusty' meaning 'evil-smelling'. The hamlet has been there for centuries. It may be that the evil-smelling plant was used for medicinal purposes, but nobody has yet identified it botanically. One of the two bicycling old ladies is called Dorothy and she comes to our Ladies Group (on her bike of course) She told me that when she has to give her address over the phone for any reason, there's always a pause, then "Er..." ! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 22 Apr 17 - 04:16 AM Ooooh, it looks nice! http://www.primelocation.com/for-sale/property/elsing/fustyweed/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 22 Apr 17 - 04:14 AM Here ya go http://www.francisfrith.com/fustyweed - and many more results when I searched for "Fustyweed village England" (without quotes) on Google's normal, not map, search. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 22 Apr 17 - 04:12 AM I'm curious Senofou, the name Fustyweed amused me, what a delightful name, so I tried to find it using Google maps. Unfortunately it wasn't found. I know, from Google, it is near Elsing. Any more info you could give. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Senoufou Date: 22 Apr 17 - 04:08 AM I've had a bus pass for years, but it's not a lot of use as there are no buses at all coming through our village. We do use the park and ride at the Airport to get into Norwich. I like buses, they are an improvement on everyone individually riding in their car. And people chat on a bus. I like chatting :) There's a lovely little family up our road who have three young children, all with gorgeous bright red hair. The whole family rides around on their bikes. The littlest one is only three, but she pedals along like a good'un. I just worry about them on our narrow roads. At least Norfolk is relatively flat! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 22 Apr 17 - 03:56 AM I'm actually not that strong, Senofou, and I'm so old and decrepit that they've given me the bus pass and the pension - which is a lot older in Ireland than in Britain, though our bus pass is superb - free travel on all nationally-run buses and trains, and with a deal with Northern Ireland so you can use it there too - I must go up; have been meaning to cross the Carraig-a-Rede bridge for some time. You're right, I couldn't carry one of the big blocks of compost, though I'm looking thoughtfully at the Ikea trailer - light and very good, and €160 - which would allow me to do so. I do occasionally beg a hitch from a friend with a big car and buy a bunch of slabs of water and slabs of tins of tomatoes and baked beans, but less often than at first. Thing is, when you have the stuff on the bike it's really not heavy; you're pushing rolling weight. I wouldn't cycle to Cork with it, but it's not a big deal to bring it home from the shops a kilometre away. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Senoufou Date: 22 Apr 17 - 03:48 AM Well you must have the strength of an ox Thompson! I couldn't even mount a bicycle, never mind pedal it. My sister does her one hour on her static exercise bike every day, but she's a lot younger than me. I buy huge compressed bales of garden compost, about the size of a washing machine (They work out much cheaper in bulk). My lovely husband carries them on his head to the boot of his car (much to the amusement of the garden centre staff!) There is no way on this earth that a bale like this could be transported on a bike. It won't even fit into my little Fiesta, which is why my husband brings his bigger car along. I have to say though in fairness, there are two old ladies in their eighties who live in Fustyweed (a village up the road from ours) who cycle everywhere. They're both slim, strong and cheerful people, and we all think the world of them. But even they get their families to transport their supermarket shopping in their cars. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 22 Apr 17 - 01:58 AM Saski water is Lidl's answer to Perrier and Badoit and Pellegrino. It's a very nice sparkling water. I know, I'm ruining the environment and i should be drinking tap water, but… it's a treat. We don't drink wine often - officially once a week, but sometimes twice if I make a risotto and we drink the rest of the bottle of white wine. So we drink Saskia water with dinner, except on the day we have lentil soup, when we drink milk. (Lidl's organic milk, creamy and delcious.) By the way, here's a link (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6Ti4qUa-OU since the blickifier isn't working, just copy-and-paste into an address bar) to a talk by a lad in Copenhagen who met an oul'fella who longed to cycle; he (the lad) ended up taking people from a local old people's home on taxi rides, this grew into a movement. It's spread all across Europe now - a bunch of people are doing it in Dublin. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: FreddyHeadey Date: 21 Apr 17 - 10:46 PM @Thompson ? Saskia water ? > thread.cfm?threadid=112989&messages=93#3851766 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: FreddyHeadey Date: 21 Apr 17 - 10:31 PM |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: FreddyHeadey Date: 21 Apr 17 - 10:27 PM "narrow" roads ? Rather difficult to define for me round here. (Cheshire) Some are so narrow that a cyclist would have to pull in to a gateway to let a car past. Overtaking a short group of cyclists is always going to be easier and safer than overtaking a long stream of them. I was taught to overtake (anything) using the full width of the road. Two three or four... abreast would be fine to me .... depending on the width of the road. Even slight inclines mean that a cyclist's speed can vary considerably, faster or slower. In a car it is quite difficult to judge that. There IS something frustrating about being behind a slower vehicle/bike/sheep and it can be stressful making an overtaking manoeuvre. Timewise could someone do the maths on how long the delays might actually be when we slow down before overtaking? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Apr 17 - 06:03 PM Greg - if those cyclists you condemn exist to the extent you suggest, then other cyclists like me would probably agree they are complete arseholes, an embarrassment, a liability to all sensible / reasonable cyclists who just want to get home after every ride, safe, unhurt, and alive...... Likewise, I'd suggest all motorists aren't necessarily sociopathic potential killers with a vendetta against all other 'inferior' road users... Hey, I've even seen local horse riders on black horses, dressed in very dark hooded clothes at dusk with no hi viz, reflectors, or torches on nearby country roads...... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 05:08 PM Not a pretty picture for people to travel safely under their own power without gobbling up fossil fuel to drag their obese carcases around…? Not to mention having half the chance of developing cancer that the motor-dragged people do! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Greg F. Date: 21 Apr 17 - 04:53 PM who brought cycling back to the streets of New York. By all means do a web search on this, to examine at length all of the myriad problems that self-entitled, born-again, fundamentalist cyclists have caused - and are causing - and will continue to cause- on the streets of New York. I've personally dealt with 'em. Not a pretty picture. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 04:51 PM Further on the garden centre biz: I can carry compost ok; haven't tried to carry sharp sand and I need some. I reckon I can probably carry it half a bag at a time, but then my nearest garden centre is within a kilometre. I regularly carry slabs of six Saskia water litres from Lidl along with the rest of my shopping. These weigh 9kg, and fit snugly in a Carradice pannier. (And yes, by the way, mostly in Ireland we're in kilometres, metres, litres and kilos now, apart from the very old. We have de-imperialised.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 04:47 PM Senofou, here's my cycle today: went to the local charity shop with a big bag of clothes and a big bag of bags; continued to the bottle bank and dumped jars and bottles; continued to the hardware shop and bought a mop-bucket, two of those plastic bags with vacuum yokeys to compress and put away my winter woollies, a bunch of scourers and a solar lamp; continued to Lidl for steaks and spinach and yogurt and bread (pumpkin seed and crispy white loaf) and croissants and chocolate and can't remember what else, and a nice spinny thing for the garden; at this stage I managed to cram it all in except the spinny windmill thing, so I took that out of the packet and put it together and cycled home with it spinning in the air above me. There are few things I can't get on the bike. My neighbour and friendly local handyman brought me to Ikea yesterday to get a bookcase with glass doors, which he then put together for me - but at a pinch, Ikea could have had it delivered. As for bad weather, it feels much worse in a car than it does on a bike. What's a pleasant mizzle, moistening your face and refreshing you, on a bike seems like a downpour in a car. As for hot weather, cycling is refreshing as the air rushes coolingly past. Sad for the driver who ran into the unlit cyclist - but quite honestly, when I was driving I never drove fast enough that I couldn't see one of these ninjas in time. Of course the cyclist should have had the legally required red light in the back and white in the front, and if she or he was in a country area then a reflective belt might have helped - but a lot is down to drivers. I'll never forget driving through Ranelagh in Dublin with a friend and screaming at him - "Paddy! Look out!" - he was about to go into a cyclist (lit up and hi-vizzed) whom he had simply failed to see. Part of this is due to an effect of the human eye - here's an interesting (to me, anyway) article by an RAF pilot about it. I'll always be grateful to this writer for introducing me to the wonderful word "saccade". I'm sorry for leaping down the throat of Jim Carroll; I don't find jokes about people trying to kill me (or rape me either) funny, and have often been accused of a lack of sense of humour by people who do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Senoufou Date: 21 Apr 17 - 03:10 PM I like my car because I can carry loads of supermarket shopping, bulky items, plants and compost from the garden centre and all sorts of stuff like that, which would be impossible on a bike. Also, it must be horrible cycling in the driving sleet, freezing wind and pouring rain. Even the hot weather must be very difficult when you're pedalling hard and sweating! I'm always very careful of cyclists, and conscious of the fact they may wobble, skid, veer off suddenly or do something unexpected. I do get cross when a cyclist has no lights at night, and no hi-viz clothes either. A poor man was killed during the night on the by-pass by one of our neighbour's sons in the last village. The chap had no lights, and the motorist felt a massive bump. He was traumatised after the event and felt dreadful, but it wasn't his fault. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 02:07 PM Those who are interested in good infrastructure, health and not killing people on the roads might like this TED Talk by Janette Sadik-Khan, who brought cycling back to the streets of New York. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 02:05 PM Not defensive at all, at least in the sense Jim Carroll means it. Certainly defensive in that I have no desire to be killed by a moron who thinks it's funny to drive dangerously close to cyclists or to pretend that it's funny to joke about running them down. Since you're in Ireland, Jim Carroll, you can listen to George Hook and Pat Kenny foaming at the mouth about cyclists in terms that bring to mind Radio-Television Libre des Mille Collines. Nasty stuff. I had intended to bring my bike to visit a friend who lives in the Burren, but I'll take your warning and skip the visit, which would have meant spending some money locally, and will warn all my high-spending cyclist buddies to stay clear, and instead cycle the Beara Peninsula, which is said to be beautiful. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Apr 17 - 12:59 PM "In fact, Jim Carroll, it is you who has put my life in danger by repeating your fascist joke, exactly the kind of dog-whistle "funny" statement that has killed many people of the "wrong" race or religion or sexual orientation or politics long through history." Nobody but a moron would take that seriously - cyclist or internet poster. Your reaction appears to be somewhat defensice - I hope you don't ever make your way to west Clare on your bike. I don't believe any diver would deliberately run down a cyclist any more than I believe a cyclist would deliberately run down a pedestrian, thoug both regularly happen - usually because of people who believe they own the road - and that can be either. Do they do sense-of- humour transplants in yor neck of the woods? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Apr 17 - 12:07 PM my considered view is that inconsiderate selfish intolerant dangerous cyclists and motorists are most probably one and the same... The same dick heads with exaggerated sense of entitlement no matter what their choice of transport or amount of wheels on any particular journey... But motorists are behind the wheels of the most lethal capability weapons on the roads... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Donuel Date: 21 Apr 17 - 11:12 AM Thompson speaks the truth from my POV. The truth however sharp and painful is still truth. It is true I am a sluggish gas burner. If car drivers are frustrated remember the larger frustration of the cyclist. The road has the law of the seas. The smaller craft has the right of way. (when physics allow) My son is 20 and only bikes or takes a bus if the distance is too great. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Greg F. Date: 21 Apr 17 - 11:07 AM ...you can and work on the principle that virtually all drivers are insane as well as homicidal. I've found, as a careful and considerate driver with 50 years plus driving experience, that it's best to work on the principle that all cyclists have a profound sense of entitlement, feel that its perfectly permissible to ignore the rules of the road, feel that the responsibility for their welfare is entirely that of motor vehicle operators and that they bear no such responsibility themselves, that they are mindless if not insane, and that they are largely suicidal. YMMD |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Apr 17 - 10:59 AM My claim to fame that nearly got me lynched was putting 'Happy shiny people' on the jukebox in the Little Angel at Goth weekend. :-) The jeans and polo will do. How's your white make up and black eye liner? Sorry, I seem to have recycled this thread... :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 21 Apr 17 - 10:50 AM I've got black jeans and a black polo shirt on, does that count..... .................... .................... ................... Dracula! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Apr 17 - 10:46 AM So, is 50Kph not still 30Mph in Ireland then Raggy :-) I have not been to Ireland for yonks but the last time I was there the distance signs were in Kms and the speed signs still in MPH. Very confusing! If I remember rightly though the urban speed limit was still 30MPH. Has it changed? Goth this weekend round your neck of the woods I think. Going to participate? :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Nigel Parsons Date: 21 Apr 17 - 10:43 AM 50Kph is 31Mph. Unless we are in a 20 limit it is legal everywhere! Speed limit + 10% + 2Mph is still the calculation used to allow for faulty speedos etc. Dunno about anyone else by the difference between my speedo and my sat nav seems to confirm that this is not far out. That is 'guidance' only, not the law. For fuller details see: Here where it clearly states: Scottish police have decided not to follow the guidance at all, and will prosecute drivers for exceeding the limit by even 1mph, regardless of any device tolerance.[3] There is also talk of a review of the guidance, which was first issued in 2011, to take account of developments in speed enforcement technology. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 21 Apr 17 - 10:40 AM The speed limits in Ireland where Thompson is based are in kilometres per hour Dave. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 10:31 AM In Ireland if you have work (including the couple of days' teaching and the like that is the mainstay of many folkies) you can take advantage of the Bike-to-Work scheme, and buy a bike for 52% off (or up to, depending on your level of tax) through a government scheme. I think the British have a similar scheme. And similar schemes, Mr Google tells me, in lots of other countries. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 10:27 AM Those motorcycle sidecars were the most deadly dangerous (for the passenger) things on the road. But Ikea have quite a nice bike for €450, and if you need it for bags of compost and stuff, you can buy a trailer to go with it for €160. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Apr 17 - 10:21 AM It's an idea.. those Russian motor bikes and sidecars based on old mid 20th century classics do appeal... I live in a town centre so don't actually need a bike... But I just miss the daily exercise cycles to the coast and back... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 10:20 AM Oh, Leeneia, you've made my day! Use all your age and guile. Phones are ubiquitous and people drive along checking them while speeding through the city streets, arguing on Facebook or Twitter or sending inane texts. The best way to cycle, in my world, is to use back streets as much as you can and work on the principle that virtually all drivers are insane as well as homicidal. Though many are decent, and if they see you will be considerate - try to catch their eye when you can. And never, never, never cycle up the inside of a truck or bus. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: leeneia Date: 21 Apr 17 - 10:09 AM Hi, Thompson. You have motivated me to get my bicycle out again. I live in a neighborhood of small streets, and I think I'll be safe. Besides, I have age and guile on my side. Punkfolkrocker, have you considered a three-wheeler? Might be worth a trial ride if you have a place to store it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Apr 17 - 10:05 AM 50Kph is 31Mph. Unless we are in a 20 limit it is legal everywhere! Speed limit + 10% + 2Mph is still the calculation used to allow for faulty speedos etc. Dunno about anyone else by the difference between my speedo and my sat nav seems to confirm that this is not far out. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 09:58 AM And I trust those faster riders aren't doing 50kph in a built up area! Do you say the same of car, 4x4, van and bus drivers? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Nigel Parsons Date: 21 Apr 17 - 09:51 AM Unless we're talking about Thompsons's speedsters, doing between 30kph & 50kph then the Highway Code should be a guide: Rule 169 Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a large or slow-moving vehicle. Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass. And I trust those faster riders aren't doing 50kph in a built up area! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Apr 17 - 09:39 AM I agree that it is the sensible thing to do, Thompson, but sadly sensible is not what always happens :-( I am not sure what the best course of action is to resolve the issue or the overall issue of traffic in general. Better public transport would be great as would dedicated lanes not only for cyclists but for other road users. And keep juggernauts off our country lanes! I am optimistic that we will get there eventually. I am just unsure where there is and what form of transport will take us :-) Cheers DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Manitas_at_home Date: 21 Apr 17 - 09:36 AM But is it easier to pass 20 cyclists riding single file or two abreast, given that you must wait until it is safe to overtake? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 21 Apr 17 - 09:23 AM Having been a Motorcyclist Thompson I consider myself to be a considerate driver. Been there, done that, got the T shirt. I find it far easier to pass cyclists if they ride in single file, especially on narrow roads, such as those found in many places in Ireland. It allows me, the motorist, to give them more "elbow room" Safer for them, safer for me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 09:09 AM No. The sensible thing, when cycling in a group, is to ride in twos, and when a car comes up, to separate into shorter bunches so the car can gradually hop past. There are two aspects to this. One is that some of the newer clubs haven't learned this. The other is that drivers are far too impatient, and when driving behind a group of cyclists going from 30kp/h to 50kp/h (if we're talking about clubs on training runs) are not prepared to wait for a safe time to pass, as they would wait without tantrums if it were a couple of tractors or trucks going the same speed. And a third thing is the tone that has already shown itself in this thread, where "cyclists" are a single group, while "drivers" are individuals. Anyone talking like this may be assured (in their happy fantasy world) that I'll bring their points up at the compulsory meeting of all the cyclists of Ireland that happens every Saturday. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Apr 17 - 09:02 AM As a life long militant cyclist, I am just as appalled as all the " Mr Angry hang and flog 'em Jeremy Clarksons " [perhaps even more so..???] when I see grown men aggressively riding bikes on pavements, or cycling whilst wearing headphones... I'm also buggered because I never learned to drive, and haven't been able to get on my bike for the last couple of years due to old blokes problems with feet and knees... so am consequently getting fatter and even less mobile.. ..bastard vicious circle...!!! 😖 .. it's the cycle of life... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 21 Apr 17 - 08:58 AM It might be legal Thompson but I would ask is it not sensible to ride in single file, particularly on narrow roads. Yesterday I witness a cyclist crossing a bridge controlled by traffic lights. The road is one vehicle wide. The lights indicated that traffic could move East to West. Guess which way the cyclist was going. Yup he was cycling West to East. He'd gone through a red light, he was going against the permitted movement of the traffic ......... who would be to blame had an accident occurred. Cyclists too have a duty of care .......... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Apr 17 - 08:57 AM Mmmm - I have reservations about the 2 abreast business too. Yes, it is legal. Yes 2 cyclists are taking no more room than 1 car but... (Din't you know there was one of them coming! :-) ) When you are on twisty and narrow dales roads and get 20 or more cycles riding 2 abreast you have the equivalent of an extremely long vehicle traveling at less than 20mph that is virtually impossible to overtake :-( There must be some common sense in the interpretation of the law and sadly that is often not in evidence. Don't get me wrong here - I cycled all over the place when I was younger, fitter and dafter but at times I feel that cyclists are doing themselves no favours. Cheers DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 08:52 AM In fact, Jim Carroll, it is you who has put my life in danger by repeating your fascist joke, exactly the kind of dog-whistle "funny" statement that has killed many people of the "wrong" race or religion or sexual orientation or politics long through history. If I am killed by some careless idiot staring at his mobile phone as he drives, or someone who thinks it would be great fun to knock a cyclist off her bicycle, you will be responsible. You'll all be writing kind words in my obituary, but you will be responsible: I point my finger at you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Apr 17 - 08:46 AM I am not disputing that you can find a 'nice 5Km' to cycle, Thompson but the phrase used was so that all journeys under 3 miles/5km (20 minutes' pleasant cycle) can be made by bicycle. I have no doubt that from our house (In Airdale) I can find a nice 5Km either towards Skipton or Towards Keighley but if I try to head out of the valley in any other direction I am faced with a minimum 20% hill within half a mile one way and within 1 mile the other. I live in the valley, not up a mountain but not all my 5Km journeys can be a 20 minute peasant trip! Mind you, if I got a lot fitter I suppose they would become a lot easier :-) Cheers DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 08:45 AM It's absolutely legal to ride two abreast, and the reason is that it's absolutely safe. The "character" in the local who wants a prize for knocking down a 50kg cyclist like me with his two-ton car is the person whose joke is likely to kill me. If you want to get cancer, it's your business. If you cycle, you cut your chances by half. Up to your silly self. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Apr 17 - 08:42 AM "I see cyclists doing some daft things on a regular basis." I drink to that one I was in Dublin last week and on a five minute walk to the nearest newsagents I counted half a dozen cyclists on the wrong side of the road or on the pavement or jumping lights - terrifying in the centre of a big city. I was delighted when Dublin city Council began to encourage cycling in the city centre to reduce congestion; now I'm beginning to wonder whether they should introduce a test and similar penalties for cycling offences to those faced by motorists. Here, in the rural west, the major hazard is from the fleets of cyclists - holiday groups, or sometimes charity rallies, who insist in riding two or more abreast on narrow, winding country roads One character in our local suggested that there should be a prize for the largest number you can knock down in one go! I was a keen cyclist in London - 10 miles a day to and from work in the beginning, but I soon realised that way lay madness - or worse Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 08:32 AM I see drivers doing daft things. Nothing broad about my brush. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 21 Apr 17 - 08:30 AM That's a pretty broad brush you're using Thompson. I see cyclists doing some daft things on a regular basis. I used to be a motorcyclist and witnessed some absolute stupidity amongst my fellow riders. (not that I was entirely innocent) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 08:24 AM Dave, depends on how hilly you mean by hilly! Unless you're living up a mountain, you can generally find a nice 5km to cycle. Raggytash, the number of cyclists killed and injured (by careless drivers) is very low in comparison to the numbers cycling. With climate change, the day of the private car carrying around one sluggish person is over. When we build proper infrastructure for cycling, as northern European cities like Odense and Oslo are increasingly doing, the number of injuries and deaths will drop to nothing other than the occasional freak my-hamster-ate-me accidents. Cycling is already far safer than driving. The main danger to cyclists sharing road space with drivers is distracted driving. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Donuel Date: 21 Apr 17 - 08:20 AM I turned a resort bike with automatic 12 speed transmission into an electric bike with a kit for the front wheel. I never went anaerobic riding it so the health benefits were negligible but the beauty is great. In this area even Olympic cyclists get killed by cars. Bike Helmets do not prevent traumatic brain injury but only mitigate the severity. Nigel is right about bikes ignoring traffic laws. If its done for car avoidance I don't see anything wrong with it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Manitas_at_home Date: 21 Apr 17 - 08:17 AM There has been a huge increase in cycling numbers along the routes where cycle lanes have been introduced in London, to the point where some junctions are now seeing more than half the movements are on bicycle in peak hours. But, in actual fact, very little space has been given over to cycle lanes as a proportion of road space, just on the cycle super highways. It seems the Uber drivers do not park but cruise around waiting for a call. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Nigel Parsons Date: 21 Apr 17 - 07:58 AM Apparently in Central London as much as 32% of traffic is Uber drivers hoping for a fare! Surely as Uber drivers are not 'Hackney cabs' they are not permitted to 'ply for hire' so they would be just as well advised to park and conserve their fuel. Bike lanes only have a chance to reduce congestion if people use them, and then it would need a large increase in cyclist numbers (with a matching decrease in driver numbers)to be effective. In Cardiff (as elsewhere in the UK)the presence of dedicated cycle lanes does not mean they will be used. Cyclists still use the road or the pavement even where cycle lanes are present. Cyclists are rarely prosecuted (in my experience) for ignoring the rules of the road. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Manitas_at_home Date: 21 Apr 17 - 07:13 AM Very few cars commute with multiple occupancy. Apparently in Central London as much as 32% of traffic is Uber drivers hoping for a fare! Bike lanes do reduce congestion in the long run as they encourage people to cycle and they seperate the 'slower' cycles from the 'faster' cars. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Apr 17 - 06:31 AM Although I understand the sentiment I think the validity of all journeys under 3 miles/5km (20 minutes' pleasant cycle) can be made by bicycle needs to be investigated. May be true in flat cities but in hilly places you can be faced with a much less pleasant 20% or steeper climb whatever direction you go in! DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Nigel Parsons Date: 21 Apr 17 - 06:13 AM A shift from cars to more active modes of travel will also decrease traffic in congested city centres and help reduce air pollution, with further benefits for health A very strange comment. If a multi-occupancy car changes to multiple cycles that is an increase in traffic. If the comment is meant to say an increase in congestion in city centres, then there would need to be a very large reduction in car numbers in order to compensate for the increased congestion caused by creating bike lanes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Raggytash Date: 21 Apr 17 - 05:49 AM Given the number of cyclists injured and/or killed in road traffic accidents I wonder if the two sets of statistics cancel each other out. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On your bike From: Senoufou Date: 21 Apr 17 - 05:12 AM Oooh I don't know Thompson. When I see cyclists on our Norfolk roads, they seem so vulnerable beside huge lorries and tractors etc. Our roads are narrow and twisting. I'm always worried about rounding a bend and finding a cyclist right in front of me. In towns, they stop right beside the exhausts of vehicles and are presumably inhaling lots of diesel and petrol fumes. It would be excellent if dedicated cycle tracks were provided everywhere (Holland has these) so one could bike in safety and without the air pollution. I'm wondering if the static exercise bikes in gyms would be equally beneficial in preventing cancer? After all, the physical movements and energy output would be the same. My sister does an hour on hers in the house, and swears it keeps her in great shape. |
|
Subject: BS: On your bike From: Thompson Date: 21 Apr 17 - 04:57 AM A gigantic study - a quarter of a million commuters studied for five years, with things like smoking and weight taken into account has revealed that cycling has an extraordinary protective effect against cancer and heart disease. The study of 264,337 people, published in the British Medical Journal, revealed that cycling is linked to a 45 per cent lower risk of cancer and 46 per cent less chance of heart disease, compared with driving or taking public transport. Walking to work was found to reduce the chance of heart disease by 27 per cent, but there was no link with a lower risk of cancer or premature death. And in fact if you walk and get cancer, you have a higher chance of dying from the cancer, whereas if you cycle, your chance of dying is way lower. Lars Bo Andersen, a professor at the Western Norwegian University of Applied Sciences, who was not directly involved in the research but wrote a commentary on it in the BMJ, said its findings "are a clear call for political action on active commuting", saying this had the potential to significantly improve public health by reducing rates of chronic disease. "A shift from cars to more active modes of travel will also decrease traffic in congested city centres and help reduce air pollution, with further benefits for health," he said. Many reports in newspapers but the graph in this report is particularly vivid in showing the health effects of cycling. It is now urgently necessary that safe, protected cycling infrastructure be built so that all journeys under 3 miles/5km (20 minutes' pleasant cycle) can be made by bicycle. |
