c***s on the road

[bennett]

Don't think it's in the uk Tam, it's too blurry to see the reg plates on the cars.

 

[tamthebam]

2 minutes ago, bennett said:

Don't think it's in the uk Tam, it's too blurry to see the reg plates on the cars.

 

I asked because back in the 1970s when Governments made public information films telling car drivers, bikers and cyclists not to be cnuts there was one about giving bicycles plenty of room. The cyclist character in the and said "you have to keep away from the gutter to avoid the drains" and Ma Bam told the young Tam "yes, cyclists have to keep out the gutter in England because the local authorities there are stupid but if you look at drains in Scotland you'll see that the slats are arranged so that bike wheels can't get caught in them". And it was true even if Ma Bam could be a bit of a McGlashan at times..

[IrishBhoy]

I have no problem with cyclists on the road in towns or cities, or any section of road where the speed limit is 30mph. I’ve never really experienced any of the stuff mentioned over the last few pages with cyclists being dicks etc. although I have seen a couple of cyclists having a go at drivers for what I assume was passing too close. 
 

Howver when the speed limit on a road is upwards of 40/50mph, and especially on winding backroads with blind corners, that’s when I think cyclists can cause a real danger to themselves and to others. Having a bike sharing the same piece of tarmac as cars, with the bike travelling at speeds of 8-12mph and the cars capable of 40 up to 100+, its an accident waiting to happen. If a car was travelling at the same speed as a cyclist on those sort of roads it would still be extremely dangerous, and if the police were to see a car do that they would pull them over. I used to drive the backroads between Blackburn and the A90 just north of Aberdeen, and almost every morning I would turn a corner doing 40/50mph to be faced with either a row of slow moving vehicles stuck behind a cyclist, or a cyclist themselves. When the difference between the speed limit and the speeds a bike is capable of achieving is as far apart as that, I don’t think it’s safe to have both of those modes of transport sharing the same road. 
 

I was luckily never involved in an accident, but you only had to listen to the local radio to hear about serious crashes happening on those roads almost daily. I’m sure anyone from up that neck of the woods could back me up on that. Not saying that cyclists are the sole reason for that, but their presence on the road has undoubtedly led to accidents. 

[Cosmic Joe]

2 hours ago, IrishBhoy said:

I have no problem with cyclists on the road in towns or cities, or any section of road where the speed limit is 30mph. I’ve never really experienced any of the stuff mentioned over the last few pages with cyclists being dicks etc. although I have seen a couple of cyclists having a go at drivers for what I assume was passing too close. 
 

Howver when the speed limit on a road is upwards of 40/50mph, and especially on winding backroads with blind corners, that’s when I think cyclists can cause a real danger to themselves and to others. Having a bike sharing the same piece of tarmac as cars, with the bike travelling at speeds of 8-12mph and the cars capable of 40 up to 100+, its an accident waiting to happen. If a car was travelling at the same speed as a cyclist on those sort of roads it would still be extremely dangerous, and if the police were to see a car do that they would pull them over. I used to drive the backroads between Blackburn and the A90 just north of Aberdeen, and almost every morning I would turn a corner doing 40/50mph to be faced with either a row of slow moving vehicles stuck behind a cyclist, or a cyclist themselves. When the difference between the speed limit and the speeds a bike is capable of achieving is as far apart as that, I don’t think it’s safe to have both of those modes of transport sharing the same road. 
 

I was luckily never involved in an accident, but you only had to listen to the local radio to hear about serious crashes happening on those roads almost daily. I’m sure anyone from up that neck of the woods could back me up on that. Not saying that cyclists are the sole reason for that, but their presence on the road has undoubtedly led to accidents. 

Maybe cars should stay off these roads then. 

[IrishBhoy]

3 minutes ago, Cosmic Joe said:

Maybe cars should stay off these roads then. 

If electric scooters with a top speed of 10mph were allowed on a 70mph motorway, would you blame the cars or the electric scooters for the chaos that would follow? 
 

I genuinely don’t have a problem with cyclists, its much better for the environment and a good way to improve health and fitness. It’s as much their right to chose to cycle as it is mine to use a car and I respect their right to use the roads. My point was more that having cars and bikes share a road where one can legally travel 5 or 6 times the speed of the other, is dangerous. 

[Benjamin_Nevis]

If electric scooters with a top speed of 10mph were allowed on a 70mph motorway, would you blame the cars or the electric scooters for the chaos that would follow? 
 
I genuinely don’t have a problem with cyclists, its much better for the environment and a good way to improve health and fitness. It’s as much their right to chose to cycle as it is mine to use a car and I respect their right to use the roads. My point was more that having cars and bikes share a road where one can legally travel 5 or 6 times the speed of the other, is dangerous. 

It's only dangerous if the drivers of the bigger, faster vehicles behave like dicks, in which case they should probably have their licences burned right in front of them.

[Jacksgranda]

I didn't realise the village had been turned into a practice route for the British Grand Prix. The speed traffic goes through here is f****** ridiculous.

And nobody in this f****** country f****** indicates. F******.

And they don't know how to negotiate f****** roundabouts, either. 

Edited April 30, 2021 by Jacksgranda
Sleppnig

[flyingscot]

10 hours ago, IrishBhoy said:

Howver when the speed limit on a road is upwards of 40/50mph, and especially on winding backroads with blind corners, that’s when I think cyclists can cause a real danger to themselves and to others. Having a bike sharing the same piece of tarmac as cars, with the bike travelling at speeds of 8-12mph and the cars capable of 40 up to 100+, its an accident waiting to happen. If a car was travelling at the same speed as a cyclist on those sort of roads it would still be extremely dangerous, and if the police were to see a car do that they would pull them over. I used to drive the backroads between Blackburn and the A90 just north of Aberdeen, and almost every morning I would turn a corner doing 40/50mph to be faced with either a row of slow moving vehicles stuck behind a cyclist, or a cyclist themselves. When the difference between the speed limit and the speeds a bike is capable of achieving is as far apart as that, I don’t think it’s safe to have both of those modes of transport sharing the same road. 

I was luckily never involved in an accident, but you only had to listen to the local radio to hear about serious crashes happening on those roads almost daily. I’m sure anyone from up that neck of the woods could back me up on that. Not saying that cyclists are the sole reason for that, but their presence on the road has undoubtedly led to accidents. 

Speed limits are not a good measure of things- the M8 has lower speed limits than many twisty single track roads in the Highlands where the only thing a cyclist would get in the way of is a couple of sheep walking about. By the speed differential measure, you'll ban agricultural vehicles from most rural roads. I also suspect it would make cycling out of many towns or villages impossible considering that many are only linked by national speed limit roads, even some journeys on the outskirts of cities would be impossible. 

I've cycled between Barrhead and Glasgow and the single carriageway sections leaving Barrhead are really stressful despite being 30mph as some drivers have to get past at any cost and attempt dangerous overtakes. Yet you can take the twisty back-roads out to Neilston that are 60mph which have hardly a car on them and are fine.  

During the week lots of cyclists are just commuting and are on these roads because they can't avoid them and there isn't sufficient (or indeed usable) cycling infrastructure provided to cope with heavy modern traffic volumes. You tend to find most cyclists actually hate having traffic build up behind them and don't like cycling in heavy fast moving traffic. Fear of traffic tends to be the main reason people say they won't cycle when surveyed, and it's usually why cyclists take to the pavement, often illegally.

8 hours ago, IrishBhoy said:

If electric scooters with a top speed of 10mph were allowed on a 70mph motorway, would you blame the cars or the electric scooters for the chaos that would follow? 

Motorways are specifically built and designed for high speed traffic so cycling, learners and slow moving vehicles are banned as nearly always there is a parallel alternative route - it's the reason however that many motorways stop at bridges and turn into A roads- see the Erskine Bridge becoming the A898 from the M898. 

That said I've often argued that cycling on a nice hard shoulder down a motorway might well be safer than some roads in towns! 

 

[tamthebam]

2 hours ago, Jacksgranda said:

I didn't realise the village had been turned in a practice route for the British Grand Prix. The speed traffic goes through here is f****** ridiculous.

And nobody in this f****** country f****** indicates. F******.

And they don't know how to negotiate f****** roundabouts, either. 

Stand there in a high vis vest with a hairdryer painted black.

Might frighten the odd one of them 

I remember driving through a village at the back of Berwick and being careful because there was a speed camera in someone's front garden. But it occurred to me that it was a bit odd to put a camera there so I parked up and examined the camera. Turned out it was a wooden box painted fluorescent yellow on a pole with a tumbler as the "lens". "Fair play" I thought "it slowed me up".

[Andy Dufresne]

4 hours ago, Jacksgranda said:

I didn't realise the village had been turned into a practice route for the British Grand Prix. The speed traffic goes through here is f****** ridiculous.

And nobody in this f****** country f****** indicates. F******.

And they don't know how to negotiate f****** roundabouts, either. 

Where we stay just now is the same,the police turn up every now and then with a speed gun and catch a few then disappear for a few months.

Edited April 30, 2021 by keithgy

[Funky Nosejob]

I don’t think you can use speed limits to decide where it’s safe to cycle. Compare…

The A71, a major, well maintained trunk road, just approaching Dalmahoy Golf Course. The speed limit is about to drop from 50mph, where it has been since leaving Edinburgh, to 40mph.

Running parallel to the A71 behind Dalmahoy Golf Course is Long Dalmahoy Road, part of NCR75 (National Cycle Route 75). Familiarity means I know which potholes to avoid. The speed limit along its length is 60mph. 

[Boghead ranter]

Special mention to the driver I was behind in the FK5 postcode yesterday. 

Followed them thru 2 roundabouts and several turns - despite them proudly having front and rear dashcams,  they never used their indicators once. 

Obviously have their dashcams "cos the roads are full of arseholes" 

[alta-pete]

Too trivial a story for here but I was involved in a minor altercation with a police car that required resolving and the very nice investigating officer enquired if I had any dashcam footage (no I didn’t).

Bit of banter followed but a very firm opinion from said officer that, notwithstanding (or maybe because of) regular Police requests for footage, those with dash cams were definitely the Ones that Required The Watching. 

Edited May 1, 2021 by alta-pete

[DA Baracus]

Whilst I don't drive and am in general pretty clueless about the rules and laws of the road, I'm pretty certain you can't jump red lights.

This morning a car that was waiting at the lights at the bottom of the Hilltown (back of the Wellgate) turned left whilst the lights were red and folk were crossing.

[tamthebam]

1 hour ago, DA Baracus said:

Whilst I don't drive and am in general pretty clueless about the rules and laws of the road, I'm pretty certain you can't jump red lights.

This morning a car that was waiting at the lights at the bottom of the Hilltown (back of the Wellgate) turned left whilst the lights were red and folk were crossing.

Jumping a red light is an offence, even for cyclists I believe.

Mowing down pedestrians is probably a contravention of Section 2 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (dangerous driving). The beauty of that one is that disqualification for at least a year is mandatory plus you have to sit AND pass the extended test of competence before you get your licence back. This is why defence lawyers will try and arrange a plea for the lesser charge of contravention of Section 3 (careless driving)

BTW Audi drivers- firing along the motorway at 100 mph can see you charged with a Section 2 because you're 30 miles over the national speed limit...

[tamthebam]

Twice in the last 2 days I've been behind cars who have slowed down for no apparent reason, come to a halt and only then put their indicators on to turn onto the other side of the road.

Mirror-signal-manoeuvre you utter fuckwits.

[IrishBhoy]

On 30/04/2021 at 17:03, flyingscot said:

Speed limits are not a good measure of things- the M8 has lower speed limits than many twisty single track roads in the Highlands where the only thing a cyclist would get in the way of is a couple of sheep walking about. By the speed differential measure, you'll ban agricultural vehicles from most rural roads. I also suspect it would make cycling out of many towns or villages impossible considering that many are only linked by national speed limit roads, even some journeys on the outskirts of cities would be impossible. 

I've cycled between Barrhead and Glasgow and the single carriageway sections leaving Barrhead are really stressful despite being 30mph as some drivers have to get past at any cost and attempt dangerous overtakes. Yet you can take the twisty back-roads out to Neilston that are 60mph which have hardly a car on them and are fine.  

During the week lots of cyclists are just commuting and are on these roads because they can't avoid them and there isn't sufficient (or indeed usable) cycling infrastructure provided to cope with heavy modern traffic volumes. You tend to find most cyclists actually hate having traffic build up behind them and don't like cycling in heavy fast moving traffic. Fear of traffic tends to be the main reason people say they won't cycle when surveyed, and it's usually why cyclists take to the pavement, often illegally.

Motorways are specifically built and designed for high speed traffic so cycling, learners and slow moving vehicles are banned as nearly always there is a parallel alternative route - it's the reason however that many motorways stop at bridges and turn into A roads- see the Erskine Bridge becoming the A898 from the M898. 

That said I've often argued that cycling on a nice hard shoulder down a motorway might well be safer than some roads in towns! 

 

To be fair you make a lot of reasonable points and I don’t really see what could be done with the current infrastructure we have. You can’t ban bicycles from public roads but I still think in certain situations it’s a recipe for disaster, and the cyclists will almost always come off worse.

I’ve never cycled on the roads but I can understand why cyclists are wary of cars around them, probably for good reason. When I drove those backroads up in Aberdeenshire I would witness almost daily some clown in an Audi S5 or similar risking crazy overtakes just to get past one car. 

[jimbaxters]

8 hours ago, tamthebam said:

Jumping a red light is an offence, even for cyclists I believe.

Can I ask for clarification from P&Bers on this please?

It's absolutely infuriating when after finally negotiating your way past a cyclist, they go past you again at traffic lights and go through the red light meaning you have to get by them again!

Is it allowed?

[budmiester1]

16 minutes ago, jimbaxters said:

Can I ask for clarification from P&Bers on this please?

It's absolutely infuriating when after finally negotiating your way past a cyclist, they go past you again at traffic lights and go through the red light meaning you have to get by them again!

Is it allowed?

No, it falls under Sec 36 RTA 1988 ( as amended) failure to comply with road traffic sign/ signal. For a cyclist it can mean a fine of up to £2400 as no penalty points can be applied to any vehicular license. The act applies to all road users mechanically propelled or not. In my previous employment I issued a few warnings to some and a couple of fines depending upon the attitude of the person involved.

 

[Benjamin_Nevis]

23 minutes ago, jimbaxters said:

Can I ask for clarification from P&Bers on this please?

It's absolutely infuriating when after finally negotiating your way past a cyclist, they go past you again at traffic lights and go through the red light meaning you have to get by them again!

Is it allowed?

You want P&Bers to clarify a scenario that you've made up? Uh, OK.