Cycling : Another way of looking at it !

[justbecause]

A) Problem is, riders can't rely on everyone to drive properly. Endless close-passes aside, it only takes one distracted/drunk/drugged driver to fail to notice your bike, ploughing straight over it - and you're history. Where infra keeps vulnerable road users physically separated from motor traffic (e.g. with kerbing) they can ride how they like without getting up drivers noses.

B) Disagree. Drivers in the traffic lane, feel they are ok passing riders in a narrow bike lane without moving out. This leads to dangerously close passes. Think it's ok for your kids go for a nice ride in that narrow bike lane? What about when a juggernaut thunders past within a couple of feet, blowing them off their bikes? Separate tarmac would clearly give them a greater chance of surviving the ride.

C) I remember making it through a fast 50mph section where the carriageway splits, with trees/shrubs in between - pretty scary. Lytham end is safe enough, with a good cycle-path along the seafront past the windmill, etc. The 20mph old road through Freckleton is ok too. We went that way and found a handy convenience store.

D) Motor traffic and bikes are not a good combination, except perhaps in traffic-calmed zones. Motorists blame cyclists, for what are in fact infra shortcomings. It's time those at the top did more to separate out the two very different modes, to the benefit of all!

I give up, it’s impossible to engage in sensible argument with someone who is so blatantly STUPID, and turns every point made into a pro-cycling, anti-motorist debate. You dismiss everyone else’s point of view, with your, if this and if that imaginations. You really need to give your head a wobble.

[The PNP]

I give up, it’s impossible to engage in sensible argument with someone who is so blatantly STUPID, and turns every point made into a pro-cycling, anti-motorist debate. You dismiss everyone else’s point of view, with your, if this and if that imaginations. You really need to give your head a wobble.

My point is, to reduce cyclist casualties and encourage bike use, things need to change for the better - via better infra.....Your position is; everything's ok if everyone abides by the rules. My question to you then is: how are you planning to make that happen?

[jamyramy]

My point is, to reduce cyclist casualties and encourage bike use, things need to change for the better - via better infra.....Your position is; everything's ok if everyone abides by the rules. My question to you then is: how are you planning to make that happen?

dear pnp iwas a club cyclist bac when it was a bit esoterical following after its post war declines,racing touring time trials ,uncle a gb winner too..all said wish i could be back on two wheels ,but todays generation of bikers appal me .thier lack of road safety knowledge ,consideration of other users,often an accident waiting to happen before ones eyes,theyve created the now them and us attitude that now prevails.was an active instructer back in the cycling proficiency days to!as club cyclists was the road politness to single out and signal motorists through,frowned on to not obey the lights ,and pavement riding a nono.whats happened now!maybe its gone so far that that road freedom has to be earned and awareness and proficiency tests are now neede to use the roads again.the caveat of enjoyed freedoms are personal responsability and respect of others use of those same values and considerations.

[The PNP]

dear pnp iwas a club cyclist bac when it was a bit esoterical following after its post war declines,racing touring time trials ,uncle a gb winner too..all said wish i could be back on two wheels ,but todays generation of bikers appal me .thier lack of road safety knowledge ,consideration of other users,often an accident waiting to happen before ones eyes,theyve created the now them and us attitude that now prevails.was an active instructer back in the cycling proficiency days to!as club cyclists was the road politness to single out and signal motorists through,frowned on to not obey the lights ,and pavement riding a nono.whats happened now!maybe its gone so far that that road freedom has to be earned and awareness and proficiency tests are now neede to use the roads again.the caveat of enjoyed freedoms are personal responsability and respect of others use of those same values and considerations.

Hi jamy, You could have been my instructor back in the day - as I took the cycling proficiency test at primary school!

The biggest difference I see between then and now, is how there's so much more traffic. It doesn't seem to matter how good a rider you are, or how courteously you behave - the sheer volume of traffic has forced many people off the roads.

Remember how lots of bikes appeared from nowhere when the first lockdown happened. Those quiet roads brought people on bikes out in numbers not seen for many years. Proving that it's fear of traffic that puts people off cycling.....Give them traffic-free tarmac and they will get on their bikes!

[jamyramy]

Hi jamy, You could have been my instructor back in the day - as I took the cycling proficiency test at primary school!

The biggest difference I see between then and now, is how there's so much more traffic. It doesn't seem to matter how good a rider you are, or how courteously you behave - the sheer volume of traffic has forced many people off the roads.

Remember how lots of bikes appeared from nowhere when the first lockdown happened. Those quiet roads brought people on bikes out in numbers not seen for many years. Proving that it's fear of traffic that puts people off cycling.....Give them traffic-free tarmac and they will get on their bikes!

yep and that tarmac freeroutes gotta come at auser cost.traffics no fear if you ride responsbly and positivly safety in mind,if you want exclusive road availa bility youve got to contribute to its provision ,then your into cycleroad tax.

[silver fox]

Hi jamy, You could have been my instructor back in the day - as I took the cycling proficiency test at primary school!

The biggest difference I see between then and now, is how there's so much more traffic. It doesn't seem to matter how good a rider you are, or how courteously you behave - the sheer volume of traffic has forced many people off the roads.

Remember how lots of bikes appeared from nowhere when the first lockdown happened. Those quiet roads brought people on bikes out in numbers not seen for many years. Proving that it's fear of traffic that puts people off cycling.....Give them traffic-free tarmac and they will get on their bikes!

Nothing to do with quiet roads, cyclists and walkers appeared in numbers because of the lockdown, the stay at home advice, it filled the need to simply get out of the confines of four walls.

As people return to work and a semblance of normality, cycling becomes as it usually is, no more than a leisure and pleasure pursuit for most.

[Desert Region]

Agree, except for the trees. There is enough verge along PNR for a good cycle-path, without removing the trees. It may require taking 2ft off the pavement, but pedestrians would still have space to walk at least two-abreast.

Are (Foot)Path-'n'-Pedal in favour of a reduction in pavement width to accommodate cycle-paths?

[local]

Something to bring up every now and then for our resident eco/cycling dunce;


A study by the European Transport Safety Council, which took place over the last decade, the Netherlands is the second most “dangerous” place for cyclists.

[The PNP]

Are (Foot)Path-'n'-Pedal in favour of a reduction in pavement width to accommodate cycle-paths?

Yes, where it's practical. E.g. an 8ft wide pavement can safely be reduced to 6ft, without any problem for pedestrians. Which along with 2 to 3ft 'borrowed' from the grass verge, creates enough space for a unidirectional cycle-path of 4 to 5ft width.

[The PNP]

Something to bring up every now and then for our resident eco/cycling dunce;


A study by the European Transport Safety Council, which took place over the last decade, the Netherlands is the second most “dangerous” place for cyclists.

How odd, because my figures show a very different picture.....Two thirds of injuries to cyclists in NL are the result of falls from the bike not involving any other party, while only a fifth involve a motor vehicle. If all causes of cyclist injury are added together, 8,100 cyclists experience injury requiring hospital attendance each year in NL.

The safety of all road-users is excellent in NL. And despite alarm over a rise in the number of cyclist injuries, cyclist safety in NL remains ahead of the rest of the world.

[Desert Region]

Yes, where it's practical. E.g. an 8ft wide pavement can safely be reduced to 6ft, without any problem for pedestrians. Which along with 2 to 3ft 'borrowed' from the grass verge, creates enough space for a unidirectional cycle-path of 4 to 5ft width.

Not forgetting that where there's a cycle path there needs also to be an e-scooter path. Although perhaps e-scooter campaigners will be satisfied for e-scooterists to use cycle-paths. I assume cycling campaigners will be happy for e-scooterists to use cycle-paths?

[justbecause]

How odd, because my figures show a very different picture.....Two thirds of injuries to cyclists in NL are the result of falls from the bike not involving any other party, while only a fifth involve a motor vehicle. If all causes of cyclist injury are added together, 8,100 cyclists experience injury requiring hospital attendance each year in NL.

The safety of all road-users is excellent in NL. And despite alarm over a rise in the number of cyclist injuries, cyclist safety in NL remains ahead of the rest of the world.

Well of course they do, we all know that you adapt everything to suit your own personal cycling mantra.

[The PNP]

Not forgetting that where there's a cycle path there needs also to be an e-scooter path. Although perhaps e-scooter campaigners will be satisfied for e-scooterists to use cycle-paths. I assume cycling campaigners will be happy for e-scooterists to use cycle-paths?

Cycle-paths would seem to be the ideal place for e-scooters, along with e-buggies and e-bikes, etc....When cycling, I wouldn't have a problem sharing space with any of those.

[local]

How odd, because my figures show a very different picture.....Two thirds of injuries to cyclists in NL are the result of falls from the bike not involving any other party, while only a fifth involve a motor vehicle. If all causes of cyclist injury are added together, 8,100 cyclists experience injury requiring hospital attendance each year in NL.

The safety of all road-users is excellent in NL. And despite alarm over a rise in the number of cyclist injuries, cyclist safety in NL remains ahead of the rest of the world.

Not my figures

[The PNP]

Not my figures

Over 8,000 cyclists requiring treatment at hospital sounds a lot. But you have to remember there are over 17milliion people in NL and most of them cycle......By comparison, British cyclists experience around four times the level of danger (in the US it's seventeen times!).