The UK Professional Drivers Discussion forum
I live near an industrial estate where there are 3 council yards and many who work for the council cycle to work and use the pavements without any incidents at all probably because there are very few pedestrians on them
It would not always be safe for cycles to use pavements but where it is safe they should be encouraged to do so
Safe cycling on pavements = plod not interested
Its quite ironic that one of the major reasons for not wanting to ride on the footpath are the other inconvenient footpath users such as pedestrians who behave in a way not at all condusive to cycling and may cause an obstacle by wandering around where they are not expected to go while listening to their iPod etc.....exactly the same things that often cause cyclists to be knocked off their bikes when they're the unpredictable and often invisible objects that cycle down the side of a large truck completely oblivious to the danger they are putting themselves in. Footpaths may not be suitable for cycling but neither are narrow inner city roads where three lanes are crammed into a junction approach where there is probably only suitable width for two lanes and trucks have to deal with all sorts of problems at every angle and until human evolution gives us more than two eyes and the ability to check more than X amount of mirrors, cameras and sensors in any given timeframe, cyclists will just have to be less reckless and take responsibility for their own actions and stop relying on everybody else to make up for their own shortfall in common sense.
Already available and I think part of the requirements for Crossrail. Won't help the cyclists wearing headphones though.
I noticed the other day a tanker with side markers that flashed with the indicators, seemed like an excellent idea that is creeping in. Anything that makes it much clearer is a good thing, I know there will still be plenty who ignore it but it's a start
Whilst this is 100% true, I'm fairly certain the drivers who do this do it on the motorway and not whilst driving through the capital. I'd not be surprised to see otherwise, but it's going to be a lot less likely.
I cannot believe anyone would be ok with truckers watching DVDs while driving, as long as its only on the motorway and not in city centres.
Cyclists were here before motor vehicles and will be here when all the diesel has dried up. Take a little extra time to get past them and content yourselves with shouting at the window. They aren't going anywhere so suck it up and get used to it.
You don't know the road in question but you're happy enough to still make some bonkers bs excuse as to why cyclists can't use the hard shoulder on it. The fact is in my experience of riding a bike many,if not most,pavements are suitable for cycle use and as far as I'm concerned anyone who thinks otherwise is as raving mad as anyone who wants to ride a bicycle in lane 1 of this road instead of using the hard shoulder.By the way the correct procedure here is for cyclists to use the exit and entry slip roads at junctions so they don't get wiped out by traffic entering and exiting the road.As for using lane 1 and expecting traffic to slow up yeah right good luck with that.
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=51.3 ... 8,,0,10.93
As I said for the cyclists it's all about martyrdom in making some bs point about them wanting to control and 'command' the road space at the expense of road traffic and the unfortunate drivers who are unlucky enough to get involved in the inevitable results.
If that's the case then why doesn't 'plod' and TFL make that very clear to everyone concerned and then go a step further by nicking cyclists for not using pavements where plod considers it safe to do so .
Last edited by Carryfast on Sun Dec 09, 2012 4:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ever noticed how there is usually only RECOMMENDED routes for cycles but no legal signs preventing them going where the planners have deemed it unsafe for them to go ?
There is only one reason for this - without identification on cycles it is virtually impossible to prosecute them
Probably because the 'authorities' are in fact controlled by a load of raving loony lefty motor transport hating nutters who'd prefer to make matyrs of cyclists for their bonkers cause.
To do that cycles would need identification plates as most would be caught doing wrong on cctv
Once cyclists know they can be easily identified then and only then will the ones taking silly risks etc start to behave correctly
How would you identify sutiable pavements ?
Back in England near where I lived there was a main road rmthat had a very wide pavement on one side so the council painted a line in the middle had one side for cycles the other for pedestrians. Whenever I used to cycle along there people would be walking in the bike bit and I felt safer on the road.
Must admit I don't like road cycling. Much I used to just cycle from my house to the river Thames to the pathway and cycle along there much safer and enjoyable.
You gotta go there to come back
I never said that it was OK, and think it completely irresponsible. However I can imaging the mentality of drivers who actually do this to be that they are OK to do it on the motorways as there is a lot less to concentrate on. I don't imagine that anybody who does this would do so whilst driving through complex built up areas. Miles and miles of motorway do need a lot less attention than a busy city centre.
Must be me then because I find I am using the same attention doing both
I'm sorry I don't see the comparison between a fairly quiet motorway on the limiter and a busy city centre with traffic lights, pedestrians, cyclists, bus lanes, drivers carving each other up, buses pulling out, stopping at random. Pretty girls or any number of other things that need your attention.
I'm not suggesting that watching a DVD is OK in any circumstances but I'm sure if plod took their unit round London they wouldn't catch drivers watching DVD's.
I did say it was probably me ....
I tend to work out who will be doing what at all times - even those way behind in the mirror view ... and on the opposite carriageway ..... I think its to do with the advanced thing being well installed into my driving
At least I never get bored !!
It's just a case of cyclists needing to get used to the fact that they're not involved in a Tour De France time trial and then shifting the responsibility which cyclists expect from road traffic onto that which pedestrians should expect from cyclists.In which case the majority of pavements in the country would be safe enough for use by cyclists.The fact is it would be a lot easier for cyclists to keep pedestrians safe in that environment than for road traffic to keep cyclists safe under the present one.
As I've said the issue is all about the authorities wanting to make cycling more attractive,by removal of as much responsibilty as possible from cyclists in their use of the roads and shifting all that responsibility onto motor traffic road users and cyclists themselves taking advantage of that situation.
Last edited by Carryfast on Sun Dec 09, 2012 5:55 pm, edited 2 times in total.
It's not a case of the 'amount' of attention required on motorways v urban areas being any different it's just a matter of it being a different 'type' of attention required.
No surprise that the dumbed down speeds of limiters set at 90 km/h or less is producing dumbed down drivers who'd rather watch the tele while they're driving than actually drive the thing to earn their wages.
Truck drivers .
Bus drivers .
Taxi / Cab drivers .
Car drivers .
Q1 ... Which one of the above is / are legally entitled to venture onto the open road without any training and or protection of any kind ?
If your answer is the same as mine then how can everyone else be expected to adjust the way they work to fit them in ?
Cyclists baffle me , why would any person insist on putting themselves in a position where they could quite easily get hurt and claim its their right to do so and its everyone elses fault ?
i have good reason to suspect i was stabbed , i found a sharp object sticking out of my back.
SENT FROM MY LAPPY USING MY FINGER
Because they are thinking, at least in part, like pedestrians which is what most are - pedestrians on wheels
I have seen roller skaters and skateboarders go as fast as cyclists but we do not put them in amongst the general traffic on the roads
^ + 1.
The difference is though cyclists seem to think that they have even less responsibility,concerning their own safety,around road traffic,away from a pedestrian crossing,than pedestrians do.
That could be the problem, What is you experiance of riding a bike, wobbling 3 or 4 miles to the local shops on a sunny weekend?
Rather then a 30 or 40 mile daily commute through all sorts of diffrent roads and weather conditions?
Is your real problem with bikes possibly down to them only having a single drive axle?
See just like i said , everyone elses fault .
You use the same tarmac as other trained and fully paid up members of the public but you still expect it all to grind to a stop just for you .
Nothing impressive about that list really its the list of people who use the road so i dont see your point .
i have good reason to suspect i was stabbed , i found a sharp object sticking out of my back.
SENT FROM MY LAPPY USING MY FINGER
Ive only ever seen city of london police nicking cyclists.
Saw a truck parked on zig zags a few months back, driver comes out of shop just as plod were passing, plod 'has words' and that was it.
When I passed my test, I was taught/told, never ever park on zig zags, 3 points.
Evil prevails when good men do nothing.
Real trucks only have one wiper and no heater!
I do alot of cycling although I am not of the lycra brigade,my advice to cyclists is to keep away from HGV,s I give them loads of room and treat them as if they will not see me. When I am at work in my truck I give cyclists loads or room in case they have not noticed me,when they are in front I let them get where they are going, you see when I am on sites and in works I never pass the back of a machine or the like unless I have made eye contact with the operator more so when its a big one and may knock my cab off,It is the same when I am out sailing I would not go neer a cruse ship or ferry so you see it is simple .
I think it's that idea of unrealistic commuting journeys by bicycle which could explain a lot of the problem.It seems obvious that there's no way that anyone could cover that type of distance in a reasonable time using pavements obviously in which the need to provide adequate consideration to pedestrians applies.It also seems obvious that such distances would require that issue of every journey being seen as a Tour De France time trial.Unlike the few miles each way of my daily commute to school back in the day.
That's of course before I was old enough to to get a driving licence and afford to buy and run a car to use for my 15-20 mile each way commute to work before which I used the bus for a year between leaving school and getting my licence.Cycling over that type of distance was never going to be a safe or practical option in my view.
The problem is that idea doesn't fit the new pc script of reducing living standards and the raving cyclist lobby.Although having said that anyone who is mad enough to be doing a commute by bicycle,in which a road like the example of the A3,forms most of the route,then their life expectancy would be a lot more if they use the hard shoulder instead of riding a bicycle in lane 1 of a motorway class road.
I have a car, I have a licence and i have enough mony to run it however i prefer to commute to work/collage/what ever im doing on the day in question providing its not foul weather and i have the time, around 30 miles is no problem, its just so much more enjoyable. and i prefer to spend the £10/15 a day on sompthing other then fuel. I know plenty of others who do a simlar thing.
If i had to ride down the A3 whitch is in no way a motorway it is a dule carrageway, motorways come under a compleatly diffrent set of regulations and do not allow cyclists, then i personally would ride as far left as is practical looking at the picture however there would be people on here spouting about cyclists riding illigally on the hard shoulder no doubt.
Just because you happend to see one cyclist doing otherwise is not a reflection on every other cyclist, I do not go out to get into any sort of danger i go for enjoyment or to get from A to B I always try to avoid dule carrageways hoever in certan circumstances it isnt practical to such as the A59 naer blackburn from the M6.
The problem,at least in the case of the girl who got run over by the turning concrete mixer,seems to be a case of cyclists needing to remember that it's more often a case of vice versa.In that it's them who are the ones that need to apply that idea if it's all about them needing to keep away from trucks.
I don't think it' a question of 'enjoyable' or not.The fact is if it's a cycling journey that can't be undertaken by use of mostly pavements then the risks outweigh any possible 'enjoyment' or money saving.As for the sections of the A3 which I'm referring to they are effectively motorway class in all else but regulation and I don't think anyone with any sense would class cycling on the hard shoulder,rather than in lane 1,of that road as 'illegal'.If anything the law should see it as vice versa which is illegal just based on the laws concerning obstruction of the highway available to them.In that case it would certainly sooner or later save someone's life.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Actrosman, Adey.C, Baidu [Spider], Big Fat Les, Bluey Circles, bobbya, bulldogman, Carryfast, cav551, codge123, Conan the Librarian, deano32, dreamingofoz, dsbu, jimbobb, Juddian, m.a.n rules, Mailman, morphie, mrdj, neilg14, phillips212, rearaxle, Roymondo, scottie0011, sonflowerinwales, TerryDactyl., trevor.mcafee, truckyboy, Wildy and 126 guests