Concerns on Cycling

[p3skydave]

Just read an article about cyclists in the London borough of Kensington and Chelsea are going to be allowed to cycle the wrong way up one-way streets.

This is going to be on a trial basis on six residential roads in the autumn.
There are going to be signs erected to advise cyclists where they can ride against traffic flow,however there will be no separate path or contra-flow lane for them.
This is being trialled because officials said that many cyclists already flout the existing law on these type of roads.

My personal concerns are that these 'trials' may spread throughout the country.It is bad enough now with 'bike riders' who ride with out lights/reflective clothing in bad lighting conditions and now we might be meeting them head on in a one-way street!!!

Regards
Dave

[Z064life]

This is news to me but I echo your safety concerns.

Even worse than this is that cyclists are allowed on A roads.

I was once put in this position:

I'm on an A road, sticking to the limit of 50mph (with other cars going faster than me - 60, even 70 I guess), and the road goes up into a bridge, just after a sliproad joins. Just after the (usually busy) sliproad and up the bridge, there is a cyclist causing massive tailbacks. Obviously he wouldn't ride on the side, what with cars going past him, inches away, at 50mph. Hardly maintains safety on such a fast and busy road. Obviously cars had to use the other lane to overtake the bike - just one slow bike doing 10mph if he is lucky, and also pushing another bike along with his other hand - hardly safe. And from where I was in the line, I couldn't even see the bike so didn't have any time to prepare for what I had in store.

But because this is not an M road, the bicycle and its owner are happily allowed to ride. It doesn't matter about safety though...

[205lad]

p3skydave said:

Just read an article about cyclists in the London borough of Kensington and Chelsea are going to be allowed to cycle the wrong way up one-way streets.

This is going to be on a trial basis on six residential roads in the autumn.
There are going to be signs erected to advise cyclists where they can ride against traffic flow,however there will be no separate path or contra-flow lane for them.
This is being trialled because officials said that many cyclists already flout the existing law on these type of roads.

My personal concerns are that these 'trials' may spread throughout the country.It is bad enough now with 'bike riders' who ride with out lights/reflective clothing in bad lighting conditions and now we might be meeting them head on in a one-way street!!!

Regards
Dave

This system works well in countries like the Netherlands, why shouldn't it in the UK?

[Z064life]

205lad said:

p3skydave said:

Just read an article about cyclists in the London borough of Kensington and Chelsea are going to be allowed to cycle the wrong way up one-way streets.

This is going to be on a trial basis on six residential roads in the autumn.
There are going to be signs erected to advise cyclists where they can ride against traffic flow,however there will be no separate path or contra-flow lane for them.
This is being trialled because officials said that many cyclists already flout the existing law on these type of roads.

My personal concerns are that these 'trials' may spread throughout the country.It is bad enough now with 'bike riders' who ride with out lights/reflective clothing in bad lighting conditions and now we might be meeting them head on in a one-way street!!!

Regards
Dave

This system works well in countries like the Netherlands, why shouldn't it in the UK?

Because this is the UK. We can't get anything to work, especially if we adapt something from another country.

Failed IT systems, currently crap roads and congestion, etc...

[205lad]

Agreed:

the UK is a prime example of failure. Perhaps we should just give up?

[vonhosen]

205lad said:

p3skydave said:

Just read an article about cyclists in the London borough of Kensington and Chelsea are going to be allowed to cycle the wrong way up one-way streets.

This is going to be on a trial basis on six residential roads in the autumn.
There are going to be signs erected to advise cyclists where they can ride against traffic flow,however there will be no separate path or contra-flow lane for them.
This is being trialled because officials said that many cyclists already flout the existing law on these type of roads.

My personal concerns are that these 'trials' may spread throughout the country.It is bad enough now with 'bike riders' who ride with out lights/reflective clothing in bad lighting conditions and now we might be meeting them head on in a one-way street!!!

Regards
Dave

This system works well in countries like the Netherlands, why shouldn't it in the UK?

Don't the dutch as a nation have a very different attitude in general to cyclists than the UK ?

[205lad]

Yes they do. However it would only take a slight reduction in the selfish asshole quotiant to see such rules working in the UK. A pipe dream perhaps given the standard attitude of the typical UK (advanced) motorist?

[vonhosen]

205lad said:

Yes they do. However it would only take a slight reduction in the selfish asshole quotiant to see such rules working in the UK. A pipe dream perhaps given the standard attitude of the typical UK (advanced) motorist?

Perhaps that's because some drivers take it upon themselves to punish other road users that they perceive as doing wrong (utilising their advanced skills of course).

[7db]

I can't see that it will make a great deal of difference - RBKC have already bdised the signage manual to allow cyclists to do almost anything; they have made junctions unreadable as a result and dangerous for pedestrians, and the cyclists disobey the directions in any case.

I raised this with the road engineer, who told that they were experimenting at the moment and hoped to have results in soon.

In my road there is a contraflow cycle lane. The buggers don't use it and cycle on my pavement and in the main carriageway.

One day they will meet one of RBKCs finest rubbish trucks -- the drivers like to swig Stella as they drive, and they wouldn't even feel the impact of another cyclist.

I don't know what the answer is, but more lawlessness isn't it.

[205lad]

vonhosen said:

Perhaps that's because some drivers take it upon themselves to punish other road users that they perceive as doing wrong (utilising their advanced skills of course).

Perhaps although I doubt anything occuring on motorways would affect cyclists.

[vonhosen]

205lad said:

vonhosen said:

Perhaps that's because some drivers take it upon themselves to punish other road users that they perceive as doing wrong (utilising their advanced skills of course).

Perhaps although I doubt anything occuring on motorways would affect cyclists.

Surely if it's OK to punish people on motorways it's OK on other roads ?

[205lad]

vonhosen said:

Surely if it's OK to punish people on motorways it's OK on other roads ?

Perhaps, I have to admit that if I'm not in much of a hurry and I'm the victim of chronic tailgaiting there's a great safe method of getting some payback.

Scenario is this- tailgaiter has been doing his/her thing. Gets far too close when traffic is stationary and has no way whatsoever of steering round my vehicle because they are practically on it's bumper. Now if there are a few of these gimps and we're on a narrow street/traffic lights and I'm at the head of them it's game on. At this point I develop a 'technical problem' and am unable to proceed. Hazards on, shrugging of shoulders and finally out of the car bonnet open for a technical inspection along with a shout of 'I've broken down'. I then let them try and shuffle their way out of the situation their crap driving has put them in. For best effect the car behind should be half way through completing a 3 point turn when I get back in my vehicle and drive away with a cheery wave.

Obviously there are a myriad variations on this, play around with it and have some fun is my advice for the advanced urban driver.

[Vipers]

205lad said:

This system works well in countries like the Netherlands, why shouldn't it in the UK?

Motorists have a different mentality in the Uk than most of the world.....

[Vipers]

205lad said:

At this point I develop a 'technical problem' and am unable to proceed. Hazards on, shrugging of shoulders and finally out of the car bonnet open for a technical inspection along with a shout of 'I've broken down'. I then let them try and shuffle their way out of the situation their crap driving has put them in. For best effect the car behind should be half way through completing a 3 point turn when I get back in my vehicle and drive away with a cheery wave.

Obviously there are a myriad variations on this, play around with it and have some fun is my advice for the advanced urban driver.

What a good driver you are?. Two wrongs don't make a right. Ignore tailgaiters, don't try to be yet another wank$r on the road, we have too many already. Just tolerate them, and show them you are a good driver.

[205lad]

The problem with just rising above behaviour like tailgaiting is that it merely allows the miscreant to go on with their error unpunished.

I firmly believe that someone who is on the receiving end of the treatment I outlined is more likely to think twice before getting so close again.

Everyone should do it and nobody would get so close.

Certainly it's much safer than the approach I used to take in company vehicles which was just to brake hard for a 'hazard' and hope for a nice fat insurance pay out for my 'whiplash'.

[vonhosen]

205lad said:

The problem with just rising above behaviour like tailgaiting is that it merely allows the miscreant to go on with their error unpunished.

I firmly believe that someone who is on the receiving end of the treatment I outlined is more likely to think twice before getting so close again.

Everyone should do it and nobody would get so close.

Certainly it's much safer than the approach I used to take in company vehicles which was just to brake hard for a 'hazard' and hope for a nice fat insurance pay out for my 'whiplash'.

And what about you going unpunished ?

You are a greater worry than them as far as I'm concerned.

[205lad]

vonhosen said:

And what about you going unpunished ?

You are a greater worry than them as far as I'm concerned.

My punishment is having to share the roads with people that tailgate in the first place.

Nothing I do on the roads is unsafe nor is it illegal and neither would I dream of doing anything that was.

[vonhosen]

205lad said:

vonhosen said:

And what about you going unpunished ?

You are a greater worry than them as far as I'm concerned.

My punishment is having to share the roads with people that tailgate in the first place.

Nothing I do on the roads is unsafe nor is it illegal and neither would I dream of doing anything that was.

Other than when you brake with the intention that someone will go into the back of you ?

Intentionally winding people up on the road is unsafe, never heard of road rage ? (& guess what it's a Sec 3 offence.)

You are a plum of the highest order.

Edited by vonhosen on Monday 18th August 11:08

[205lad]

vonhosen said:

Other than when you brake with the intention that someone will go into the back of you ?

Intentionally winding people up on the road is unsafe, never heard of road rage ? (& guess what it's a Sec 3 offence.)

You are a plum of the highest order.

Edited by vonhosen on Monday 18th August 11:08

As I clearly stated I don't brake with the intention that someone will go into the back of me any longer (and never did of course I was braking for a 'hazard').

Neither would I intentionally 'wind' people up. It isn't my fault if they drive too close and then I have a 'technical problem' which means I cannot progress further.

As for being a 'plum' there's only one fruit round here and it's you ducky.

[vonhosen]

205lad said:

vonhosen said:

Other than when you brake with the intention that someone will go into the back of you ?

Intentionally winding people up on the road is unsafe, never heard of road rage ? (& guess what it's a Sec 3 offence.)

You are a plum of the highest order.

Edited by vonhosen on Monday 18th August 11:08

As I clearly stated I don't brake with the intention that someone will go into the back of me any longer (and never did of course I was braking for a 'hazard').

Neither would I intentionally 'wind' people up. It isn't my fault if they drive too close and then I have a 'technical problem' which means I cannot progress further.

It's exactly what you are saying, every post of yours is littered with this rubbish. I'll not be responding to anything you post anymore because it's trolling crap. Conversely I very much hope to witness your illegal behaviour (& the fact you don't think it is, is inconsequential) out on the streets, because I'll take a great deal of pleasure in doing a public service & reporting you for it. That's of course if somebody hasn't stabbed or shot you first.

Edited by vonhosen on Monday 18th August 12:00