Speed limits: 40mph plan for country roads

Our transport is heavily oil-based. What are the alternatives?

Moderator: Peak Moderation

SleeperService
Posts: 1104
Joined: 02 May 2011, 23:35
Location: Nottingham UK

Post by SleeperService »

JohnB wrote:I thought we were talking about country roads. Cycle paths are urban things, and are only found in "country" areas on the edge of urban ones where there is enough cycle traffic to justify them. Real country roads weren't designed for the infernal combustion engine.
That's part of the problem in the UK. On the continent there is a national cycle route scheme where dedicated, specially built cycle paths and, sometimes, country roads connect built up areas. On roads so used there's a width restriction and cars are deemed to be using a cycleway. Very sensible compromise IMHO. In towns the route is generally along side streets but, wherever the car is assumed to be at fault if there's a collision. It's steam gives way to sail on land.

The only people you see riding cycles on the path are crossing it to get to their house or tourists. The police take an interest in this. An English middle aged couple in Ostend paid 50 euros each to learn. If they'd be a bit more contrite and a bit less aggressive they'd have been fine.
Scarcity is the new black
User avatar
emordnilap
Posts: 14814
Joined: 05 Sep 2007, 16:36
Location: here

Post by emordnilap »

When I hit a pothole I blame myself for going too fast.
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
JavaScriptDonkey
Posts: 1683
Joined: 02 Jun 2011, 00:12
Location: SE England

Post by JavaScriptDonkey »

RogueMale wrote: You're disagreeing with the highway code: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTr ... /DG_070314 (Rule 163). If you drive a car you have to abide by the rules. If you don't, you shouldn't be driving. Of course, bicyclists should abide by the rules too.
No I'm not.

Although the HWC isn't of itself law.

The picture version of overtaking a cyclist shown on your link doesn't apply to country roads as many simply aren't that wide.

I do leave as much room for a cyclist as for a car. What I don't do is pretend that the cyclist is actually as wide as a car and then leave that amount extra as well. I picture their offside to be the offside of any other vehicle and leave an appropriate amount of fresh air. Some riders warrant more space as do some roads.

I completely agree about all road users abiding by the laws. Glad to have you on-board with the idea of tax, MoT, registration plates and licences for cyclists.
Snail

Post by Snail »

the idea of tax, MoT, registration plates and licences for cyclists
What a crazy, stupid, and annoying idea. Stronger words aren't coming to me.
RogueMale
Posts: 328
Joined: 03 Jan 2010, 22:33
Location: London

Post by RogueMale »

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:
RogueMale wrote: You're disagreeing with the highway code: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTr ... /DG_070314 (Rule 163). If you drive a car you have to abide by the rules. If you don't, you shouldn't be driving. Of course, bicyclists should abide by the rules too.
No I'm not.

Although the HWC isn't of itself law.

The picture version of overtaking a cyclist shown on your link doesn't apply to country roads as many simply aren't that wide.

I do leave as much room for a cyclist as for a car. What I don't do is pretend that the cyclist is actually as wide as a car and then leave that amount extra as well. I picture their offside to be the offside of any other vehicle and leave an appropriate amount of fresh air. Some riders warrant more space as do some roads.

I completely agree about all road users abiding by the laws. Glad to have you on-board with the idea of tax, MoT, registration plates and licences for cyclists.
I never implied that: regulations for bicycles are different from those for cars, and for good reasons.

With those attitudes I hope you never pass me when I'm out on my bike. On a single track country road, you should wait patiently behind the bicyclist until the road widens, then overtake very slowly. You'd have to stop and possibly reverse if a car came in the other direction.

You might hold bicyclists in contempt at present, but in a few years time when petrol prices become prohibitively expensive, or petrol use is restricted to essential vehicles, you'll have to join us.
User avatar
emordnilap
Posts: 14814
Joined: 05 Sep 2007, 16:36
Location: here

Post by emordnilap »

Well said. Muscle trumps power-assisted every time, as it rightly should.
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
re
Posts: 152
Joined: 13 Jun 2008, 14:44
Location: South Wales
Contact:

Post by re »

JavaScriptDonkey wrote: I completely agree about all road users abiding by the laws. Glad to have you on-board with the idea of tax ... for cyclists.
+1 Absolutely agree 100%. Cyclists should pay the same tax as car users - which is proportional to their CO2 emissions. So I guess it should be somewhere between zero and feck all.
User avatar
PS_RalphW
Posts: 6977
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Cambridge

Post by PS_RalphW »

I already pay as much tax to cycle as I do to drive. Zero.

(Except of course for tax on fuel at about 63% compared to tax on sweets at 20%).
User avatar
emordnilap
Posts: 14814
Joined: 05 Sep 2007, 16:36
Location: here

Post by emordnilap »

I agree. Any taxes should be proportional to harm done.

Such as: noise levels, pollution caused, space taken up, harm to others, resources consumed, need for policing, need for infrastructure, need for emergency services etc etc.

From this list, you can see that vehicle owners and sweet eaters are taxed too lightly, cyclists too heavily.
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
JavaScriptDonkey
Posts: 1683
Joined: 02 Jun 2011, 00:12
Location: SE England

Post by JavaScriptDonkey »

I see the cyclo-fanatics are out in force, blinded by their hatred as usual.

We all share the roads and should all contribute. The number of pedestrians injured and even killed by errant cyclists is too many. Drivers that behave badly can usually be traced and punished - why should cyclists be any different?

Better maintained bikes ridden by better trained cyclists will mean less injuries and deaths. Who doesn't want that?

In fact you can only argue against the proposals if you think that they might make your life slightly more complex or expensive.

NIMBYs the lot of you.

As to the HWC suggesting that you should slowly waiting behind a cyclist as he dawdles along I think you are ignoring half the story. If is as much incumbant upon the cyclist to ensure that he doesn't hold up other road users as it is upon other road users to wait for the cyclist.

Share. Look after each other. Be nice.

I told you problems set in when people get a sense of entitlement in their head.

As to my driving, I was first knocked off my bike when I was 10. A car decided to pull across the road in front of me. I've been sandwiched between a bus and lorry, encountered idiots speeding the wrong way on roundabouts and countless other minor aggravations. My cycling improved immensely when I started riding motorbikes as the training was fantastic. Both improved when started driving on 4 wheels.
I have now covered many 100,000s of miles and have yet to cause an accident but I have lost friends to RTAs and witnessed some appalling incidents.

I have no love for stupid and dangerous drivers but I also think that arrogant selfishness is the cause of much anger on our roads. If we learn to share it will be a nicer journey.

I don't really see other road users as 'drivers' or 'cyclists', I just see people. You should try it.
User avatar
emordnilap
Posts: 14814
Joined: 05 Sep 2007, 16:36
Location: here

Post by emordnilap »

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:I don't really see other road users as 'drivers' or 'cyclists', I just see people. You should try it.
From my experience, that 'you' is a hell of a lot of vehicle owners.

BTW, on a bike or in a vehicle, I follow the rules. I wish other road users would.
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
JavaScriptDonkey
Posts: 1683
Joined: 02 Jun 2011, 00:12
Location: SE England

Post by JavaScriptDonkey »

emordnilap wrote:
JavaScriptDonkey wrote:I don't really see other road users as 'drivers' or 'cyclists', I just see people. You should try it.
From my experience, that 'you' is a hell of a lot of vehicle owners.

BTW, on a bike or in a vehicle, I follow the rules. I wish other road users would.
Sadly you are not wrong.

Only yesterday I was driving home and on the other side of the road was a single lycra clad cyclist. Behind him was a half loaded bus and behind that a string of cars and vans.

I expect the cyclist was utterly convinced of his right to cycle on the road at that time but the right thing for him to do would be to pull over and let all those people pass.

Never seen it though and I doubt I ever will.

I liken it to be on a footpath. No one would arrogantly walk down the middle blocking anyone that wanted to walk a little faster, insisting that everyone else waits for them. Yet as soon as he sees those same people inside cars he no longer cares and simply makes them wait.
RogueMale
Posts: 328
Joined: 03 Jan 2010, 22:33
Location: London

Post by RogueMale »

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:I see the cyclo-fanatics are out in force, blinded by their hatred as usual.

We all share the roads and should all contribute.
Net CO2 emissions by bicycles, negative. (Bicyclists would be driving or walking instead.) Damage to road surfaces - mostly caused by lorries and buses - too small to measure. Contribution to congestion - less than cars. I concede that motorcycles might cause even less congestion as they take up little space on the road and can keep up with fast traffic. In towns, cars and bicycles go at about the same speed, out of town there's usually room to overtake.
The number of pedestrians injured and even killed by errant cyclists is too many. Drivers that behave badly can usually be traced and punished - why should cyclists be any different?
They shouldn't, and usually aren't. (And don't forget that not all car drivers are prosecuted for causing collisions, even when the police are informed.) The number of deaths and injuries caused by car drivers - even per mile travelled - is far greater though. We shouldn't be looking at a particular set of casualties in isolation though. We should be looking at overall life expectancy, factoring in quality of life. Getting people off bicycles and into cars isn't gong to help - not only more serious collisions, but also less exercise, more obesity, more heart disease, type 2 diabetes, etc.
Better maintained bikes ridden by better trained cyclists will mean less injuries and deaths. Who doesn't want that?
I can't recommend it too strongly, but I don't think it should be enforced, as the result would be that almost everyone would be put off bicycling. Your suggestion of number plates, road tax (which car drivers haven't paid since the 1930s), etc. is about as sensible as requiring that cars shouldn't be driven unless someone runs in front of them waving a red flag. That too might reduce the number of collisions, and would result in a net increase in physical fitness, at least for the red flag wavers. A better solution - tough driving tests, compulsory insurance and checks on roadworthiness, etc. is what we need and what we now have. It still doesn't stop people being killed but it's about as far as you can reasonably go to reduce collisions.
In fact you can only argue against the proposals if you think that they might make your life slightly more complex or expensive.
Your proposals were called "crazy, stupid and annoying" - but other than that would be more trouble to implement than they'd be worth. Which is why hardly anyone, including the Government, takes them seriously.
NIMBYs the lot of you.

As to the HWC suggesting that you should slowly waiting behind a cyclist as he dawdles along I think you are ignoring half the story. If is as much incumbant upon the cyclist to ensure that he doesn't hold up other road users as it is upon other road users to wait for the cyclist.
Depends on individual circumstances. If I'm going slowly - e.g. enervated for whatever reason - I do pull in to let traffic past. In other circumstances, it's not too much to ask drivers to be patient - to wait for a gap in the traffic, while I move a bit closer to the kerb. How many seconds of their valuable time am I wasting?
Share. Look after each other. Be nice.

I told you problems set in when people get a sense of entitlement in their head.

As to my driving, I was first knocked off my bike when I was 10. A car decided to pull across the road in front of me. I've been sandwiched between a bus and lorry, encountered idiots speeding the wrong way on roundabouts and countless other minor aggravations. My cycling improved immensely when I started riding motorbikes as the training was fantastic. Both improved when started driving on 4 wheels.
I have now covered many 100,000s of miles and have yet to cause an accident but I have lost friends to RTAs and witnessed some appalling incidents.

I have no love for stupid and dangerous drivers but I also think that arrogant selfishness is the cause of much anger on our roads. If we learn to share it will be a nicer journey.

I don't really see other road users as 'drivers' or 'cyclists', I just see people. You should try it.
Me too. Most cars are driven well, and the number of courteous drivers exceeds the number of arseholes.

My own training? I've been riding a bicycle for decades, and passed my driving test many years ago. I'd recommend anyone riding a bicycle on busy roads either to do Bikeability or pass their driving test. It goes without saying that adults shouldn't ride bikes on the pavement. (I understand why they do - they're scared of sharing the road with motor vehicles.)

I could drive a car everywhere - I'm already licensed and insured to - but that would mean buying rather than sharing one, paying for fuel and maintenance, putting on weight or paying for and using gym membership, and adding to traffic congestion and pollution. Cost of keeping a bike in good condition - well under £100 per year. It's possible to do your own maintenance. That was possible in cars too once, but cars are AIUI too complex nowadays for that to be feasible.
Little John

Post by Little John »

In terms of pulling over to let cars past, there is a bit of a balance to be drawn there. From my own cycling experience, if ride right up to the left hand kerb, then the cars start racing past you with only inches to spare at high speed. This, then, traps you right up to the kerb, a very dangerous place to be. The reason is that if a car seriously cuts you up, you have absolutely nowhere left to go except into the kerb, running the significant risk of coming off and getting run over. Thus, whenever I ride my bike on a busy road, I occupy the centre of the left hand side of the lane I am travelling in (in other words, 25% of the way out from the kerb to the middle of the road). This way, I am affording the cars behind me some wiggle room to get past, but not so much that I do not have some room to pull over to the left in an emergency.
User avatar
JohnB
Posts: 6456
Joined: 22 May 2006, 17:42
Location: Beautiful sunny West Wales!

Post by JohnB »

You've also got nowhere to go when when you come across a sunken drain, or the road breaking up around a manhole.
John

Eco-Hamlets UK - Small sustainable neighbourhoods
Post Reply