h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Amen on the pot holes and drains when you keep far to one side. I have road tyres. Thing and really high PSI. I just can't cycle over that stuff at anything other than a snails pace.

FB

That's why I switched to a cyclocross with 35c tyres, I was sick fed up of fixing punctures. The side benefit is the ride is far comfier.

Single cycles or small groups are ok, but some use fast A roads the older single carrageway roads. There is often a quque of 30 plus vehicles say what you like this will cause frustration.

Mobs of cycles riding 2 or 3 abrest are a dangerous obsticle and must be guilty of some form of obstruction, they do have every right to be on the the road but that dose not mean they can hinder the free flow of other lawful traffic.

What about the holidy cycle users I have seen tots on the road with thair parents, the children useing cycles with stabalising wheels, out amoungst holiday traffic in the New Forest madness. The death toll will rise its inevatable even sailors dont take on ships in the main shipping lanes.

The cycling law needs to be clear and put more pressure on SOME cycle usere to be a little less recless. And cycle users should prehaps be required to have insurance for road use

NB a public footpath is not a cyclepath some cycle users seem to regard it as thair right to barge past walkers causeing some distress.
Carying a 5ft staff seems to make them slow down somewhat however

I've seen a few mobility scooters being driven on the road a while back ... I wonder what happened to them ... always seemed a little treacherous being so low to the ground. Then again when they are bombing along the pavement they can be quite a hazard to fellow pavement users.

Mobility scooters should not* be allowed on the pavement. and I say this as someone who was hit by one. Injury from which was worse than the last time, before which when I was hit by a car going slowely at a junction... the mobility scooter was in no condition to be driving one, on the road, pavement or anywhere; bad eyesight, worefully slow reactions, and little awareness of her environment or what she was doing...

Does cycling profeciency test still exist in the UK?: we all had to do it when we were at primary school; those who didn't pass were not permitted to cycle to school... (I should stil have my badge somehwere!... maybe I shouldn't put it down on my CV when applying for jobs, though, now I'm 36.....)

Couple of things there Bob - it's perfectly legal for cyclists to ride two abreast and given that the Highway Code says cyclists should be given the same space on the road as a car, the maneuver to overtake them should be exactly the same as that for overtaking a car.

<>

Actually, powered ships must give way to sailing vessels.

As for insurance - are you saying an 8 year old child should have insurance? What if their pocket money can't cover the premium?

Re mobility scooters, some are road legal and can travel at up to 8mph. As such they are required to have road fund licences, be insured and to have the necessary lights. They have as much right as anyone else to be on the road. Other scooters are restricted to 4mph and are not allowed to be on the road. If they're not allowed on the road and pedestrians don't want them on the pavements, maybe we should go back to the good old days when the housebound were prisoners in their own homes - out of sight and out of mind eh?

I do have insurance - if you join the CTC or British cycling you get automatic third party insurance.

But frankly Bob, that was a pretty ignorant and typical post from a motorist. Might does not make right. The vast majority of cycle related KSI incidents are the driver's fault. It is overwhelmingly the case so. It is drivers who need to be more careful - it is not acceptable than many cyclists get killed or seriously injured just because motorists get 'frustrated'. They need to chill out or be seriously punished if they do recklessly hurt someone.
The delay caused by cyclists to motorists has been estimated to be an average of under 10 seconds per journey.
How often do you get held up by a truck/tractor/other cars in comparison to bike really?
I have long ago lost count of the number of cars who overtake me only to stop again immediately at a junction/queues/traffic light - what a waste of their time and energy.

And mothers should most certainly be able to cycle with their children on open roads and be free from aggression and danger for motorised vehicles. It is actually quite outrageous that motorist think this is in some way irresponsible. The only irresponsible ones are the drivers who think it's OK to behave in a way that endangers such people.

A good place to start is with 10 Common Asked Questions:
http://www.ctc.org.uk/sites/default/files/file_available-to-everyone-no-log-in-required/1307ctc10-common-questions.pdf

You can get very Police-style hi-vis which have POLITE written in blue on the back, with 'Please be' above and 'when driving' below.

<BB<

I cycle quite a lot. I always have. Firstly because I was too young to drive, then because it’s healthier and I enjoy it. I drive, and I love driving, but I really do think that most drivers have no idea about other road users. There’s lots of common misconceptions, and most of them are encouraged by the media who themselves don’t do any research but love a good story.
The first one: Cyclist don’t pay road tax so they shouldn’t be on the roads. Sorry, but car drivers don’t pay Road Tax either. Road Tax hasn’t existed since 1937. It’s *car tax* and is based on things like import duty and emissions. As such, cycles, like low emission cars, would be exempt.
The second one: Drivers and Cyclists are at war. Are we? I’m at war with myself am I? Well, I shan’t beat myself up about that. A lot of cyclists are drivers too. What it comes down to, is that there are bad drivers, and there are bad cyclists.
Going through red lights, going the wrong way down one way streets, cycling on pavements, cycling two abreast. These are just some of the things that cyclists do that annoy drivers. Going through red lights? Illegal and cars do it too. Most cars these days see lights changing and speed up to get through. Wrong way down a one way street? Yup, illegal. Often it’s because it’s a massive short cut and when you’re cycling several miles under your own steam, a shortcut is well received. But cars can’t really do it, so it’s a toys out of the pram jealousy. Cycling on pavements? Yeah, that’s illegal too. A lot of cyclists do it though because they don’t know, and don’t care. A few do it because the roads can be too dangerous, but to be honest most cyclists on the pavements are general gits who couldn’t give two hoots. Cycling two abreast? Yeah, that’s actually illegal too. It’s allowed when overtaking, same as it is for cars, but you’re not supposed to continue to do it. Plus, it’s a bit inconsiderate really. When you cycle single file, generally cars can pass unless it’s a narrow road. But they can’t when you cycle two abreast, and that causes frustration.
So, cyclists are totally innocent here. But drivers? Wow, where to start? A bugbear of mine: parking in the cycle lanes. This really annoys me. Those lanes were put there because there’s a larger amount of cycle traffic, and they need to be kept away from the motor traffic for safety. So parking in them, and forcing the cyclists out into the traffic? Yeah, thanks for that. Edging their way out of side streets? Yup, totally block off the space on the road a cycle uses just so that you can use the vain hope that cars will see you’re trying to pull out, and let you out. The cars aren’t stopping, but you’re forcing me to. Turning left in front of a bike you’ve just sped up to overtake? Sorry, but at what level do you think this is a good thing? There’s no good point about this, stop being an idiot. Passing without enough room. It’s a narrow road, there’s traffic coming the other way, but hey, you can squeeze your car through there only risking a scratch or a clipped wing mirror (which’ll pop out again). Sorry, but you clip me with your wing mirror then I’m likely to be nudged under your car and killed. Thanks for thinking of my health there.
I could easily go on, but it boils down to a simple thing, it’s not that cyclists are idiots, or that drivers are idiots. It’s that people are idiots. And people cycle and people drive. People need to be more considerate of those around them, rather than continuing the trend of the entitlement generation we’ve got.

>Cycling two abreast? Yeah, that’s actually illegal too. It’s allowed when overtaking, same as it is for cars, but you’re not supposed to continue to do it. Plus, it’s a bit inconsiderate really. When you cycle single file, generally cars can pass unless it’s a narrow road. But they can’t when you cycle two abreast, and that causes frustration.<

Sorry this is wrong - it is perfectly legal to cycle two abreast. Can be a bit impolite on occasions though I'll grant you.

Rule 66

66
You should

keep both hands on the handlebars except when signalling or changing gear
keep both feet on the pedals
>>never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends<<
not ride close behind another vehicle
not carry anything which will affect your balance or may get tangled up with your wheels or chain
be considerate of other road users, particularly blind and partially sighted pedestrians. Let them know you are there when necessary, for example, by ringing your bell if you have one. It is recommended that a bell be fitted.

from the highway code.

Good link Bluebottle - I might refer to that myself in the future.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzE-IMaegzQ

Yes that's quite famous
On a more sober note, last year London police had a 'crackdown' on cyclists using a bus lane somewhere in London thereby forcing all two-wheeled traffic onto a much more dangerous route. About two weeks later there was a fatality on the alternative 'legal' route.

for the police on that one

My apologies Orcus, I was always led to believe it was illegal.

But it is impolite and one of the main reasons drivers get annoyed.

What irritates me are cycle lanes with cars parked in them or ridiculous cycle lanes which start and finish in random locations. I'm sure councils set a target for x miles of cycle lane a year then do 20m here, 30m there until they hit their target.

Here's my favourite silly one - http://i39.tinypic.com/2v2urzp.jpg

Any thoughts on Critical Mass?

Oi! I'm on a diet you know!

>My apologies Orcus, I was always led to believe it was illegal.

But it is impolite and one of the main reasons drivers get annoyed.
<

Hmm. Well it *can* be impolite - I said that and I've cycled in groups where it wouldn't have hurt some people to move over but there are safety aspect to cycling two abreast - you're more easily seen and so it forces the motorist to overtake properly and actually look for a safe opportunity. What's more difficult to overtake a peloton of 10 two abreast or a chain gang of 10 not two abreast? Not to mention two mothers riding abreast to be more visible. I suspect you'd find the chain gang far more difficult to overtake.
Large pelotons of course tend to be very experienced cyclists who will likely (at least on the flat) be charging at up to 30 mph anyway - hardly that much of an obstruction.

And when it comes to a contest of politeness I'm not sure motorists can claim any moral high ground. Hell no. Yeah, let's get out of the way so they can drive at 40 in a 30 zone, 50 in a 40 zone, accelerate at an amber light... do whatever the hell *they* like.

As to whether it's one of the 'main reasons drivers get annoyed' well that's up for debate. Motorists have a whole swathe of things they like to whinge about - many of which are listed in that CTC FAQ Bluebottle posted above. I'm not sure cycling two abreast compares with the complaints I hear most often which is the riding on pavements/jumping red lights/not paying 'road tax' meme.

Critical mass? Not my thing - don't really know all that much about it. From what I've seen it looks like a nice idea that's been highjacked by idiots on both sides.