Live blog: Greater Manchester Deputy Police Constable recommends "high visibility clothing and a torch" for cyclists and pedestrians following spate of drink drive deaths, Dimension Data pro bike auction, Sustrans' National Cycle Network comments + more

tsarouxaz wrote:

what would a torch and hi vis clothing do on a drunk driver??????????????????????? I prefer the drunk driver out of the equation!!

I'm sure I read somewhere that drunk drivers are actually *more* likely to hit something lit up with a torch or - certainly - a blinky light.  They tend to be a bit mesmerised, and go toward the light...

brooksby wrote:

tsarouxaz wrote:

what would a torch and hi vis clothing do on a drunk driver??????????????????????? I prefer the drunk driver out of the equation!!

I'm sure I read somewhere that drunk drivers are actually *more* likely to hit something lit up with a torch or - certainly - a blinky light.  They tend to be a bit mesmerised, and go toward the light...

Moths. You're thinking of moths.

hawkinspeter wrote:

brooksby wrote:

tsarouxaz wrote:

what would a torch and hi vis clothing do on a drunk driver??????????????????????? I prefer the drunk driver out of the equation!!

I'm sure I read somewhere that drunk drivers are actually *more* likely to hit something lit up with a torch or - certainly - a blinky light.  They tend to be a bit mesmerised, and go toward the light...

Moths. You're thinking of moths.

Yup - drunk or tired moths who are driving motor vehicles 

https://janheine.wordpress.com/2014/04/12/when-more-visible-≠-safer-target-fixation/

HoarseMann wrote:

High-viz and torches? Given the threat in Manchester seems to be from drug drivers, maybe they should suggest wearing luminous 90's rave scene clothing and carrying glow sticks?!

Cyberdog is closed, sorry mate. 

Organon wrote:

HoarseMann wrote:

High-viz and torches? Given the threat in Manchester seems to be from drug drivers, maybe they should suggest wearing luminous 90's rave scene clothing and carrying glow sticks?!

Cyberdog is closed, sorry mate. 

Lol. Anyone remember prime period Gatecrasher?

HarrogateSpa wrote:

According to a Cycling UK poll in June, the top reasons for not cycling are being worried about sharing the road with lorries, and close passes. (When you see the K2 Transport near miss of the day, you can't blame them).

The top two things that would make people cycle are more cycle paths away from the road, eg in parks, and more segregated infra with physical protection from the traffic.

So yes, improve the roads, and let's have more enforcement. That would help those of us who ride bikes already. But the best way to get mass cycling in towns and cities, not 2% of trips, is dedicated infrastructure, that is safe, convenient and a complete network.

Despite this sustrans story you still seem unable to get the point: those who distribute funds for transport infrastructure will not spend anything like the necessary amount on even the paltry cycling infrastructure we have now, let alone a whole network paralleling existing roads, for use only by cyclists.

And in any case, such new cycling infrastructure would do nothing for the many other victims of cars - pedestrians, horses and car occupants themselves. Nor will it do much to reduce the hugely damaging pollution and other vast costs of cars.

The answer that meets every requirement is to CURB THE CAR. not to spend zillions of money and materials on alternatives to the perfectly adequate roads - a "solution" which will never occur anyway.

Cugel

HarrogateSpa wrote:

According to a Cycling UK poll in June, the top reasons for not cycling are being worried about sharing the road with lorries, and close passes. (When you see the K2 Transport near miss of the day, you can't blame them).

The top two things that would make people cycle are more cycle paths away from the road, eg in parks, and more segregated infra with physical protection from the traffic.

So yes, improve the roads, and let's have more enforcement. That would help those of us who ride bikes already. But the best way to get mass cycling in towns and cities, not 2% of trips, is dedicated infrastructure, that is safe, convenient and a complete network.

The top thing would be removal of motorvehicles from the existing and infra which is wide, direct and continuous, even the Dutch infra is rather lacking in all three of these at any one time, particularly in towns and cities.

Why do you think that cycling rates in NL have stagnated for years, even since the massive uptake in e-bikes? It's all well and good saying build segregated but the simple fact is that in the UK we are never, ever going to get close to what the Dutch have and even then it's flawed. it's flawed so much that even the Dutch can only illicit so much cycling out of their citizens which is still 50% less than modal share of cycling in the UK back in the late 40s that used the road network!

Segregated is so flawed in fact that despite all the noise no-one wants to explain why there are over 60 deaths where segregated infra crosses roads. Using the road network with zero or very limited motorvehicle on it, with absolute zero motor traffic in town and city centres would have a massive impact on that.

Segrgated IF at least 2.5m wide in each direction, direct and priority/uninterrupted at all times, yup, I'd go with that along major out of town routes.

The Danes are taking back the streets, Oslo is going to ban motors in the next few years, you see the impact of motor free roads in places like Peru, Mexico, Brazil. Segregated is NOT the true solution, it's always more circuitous, even in NL is narrow in many places and it criss crosses roads far too often which ends up with a ridiculously high number of deaths at those junctions, removing motors from the existing infra is by far the best solution. 

hawkinspeter wrote:

When I see a Sustrans path, I usually assume that you'll need a mountain bike (or similar) to actually use it. Sustrans has become synonymous with really poor quality.

It would be a really useful addition to their maps if they admitted this and colour-coded routes according to how offroad a bike you need to cycle on them...

GrahamSt wrote:

Just to defend Sustrans a little (speaking as user, supporter and volunteer). The routes around me (NCN72, 10, and 14) are generally very good and are the reason I am able to safely commute to work through relaxing countryside paths instead of fighting it out with busy city traffic on A roads.

Please also remember that Sustrans do not own most of the routes. They volunteer to manage them, remove rubbish, cut back overgrown plants and maintain signage etc, but most routes are owned by the Local Authority or other landowner.

Generally speaking Sustrans do not have authority (or funds) to do major works on the routes. If you think a route needs resurfacing then often you want to be contacting your council, not moaning about Sustrans being useless.

Better still, instead of moaning, get involved and help.

My disappointment with Sustrans is not over their authority or funds to do major works, but my perception that they don't stand up and say 'This isn't good enough and we won't endorse it'. There are some terrible bits of infracstructure here in Southampton that seem to have been designed with Sustrans involvement which allows the authorities to (implicitly or explicitly) claim Sustrans approval. I'd really like to see Sustrans clearly oppose crap design. Maybe they do - but if they do it's not terribly obvious to me. (All my subjective viewpoint I acknowledge).  

daflj wrote:

my perception that they don't stand up and say 'This isn't good enough and we won't endorse it'.

Yeah that is definitely an issue.

They have a difficult balancing act to maintain. They work by consent and need to remain amicable with local authorities and landowners. This can mean that they sometimes need to compromise too much for some people to stomach. I sympathise with that.

I think Sustrans have often taken the view that it is better to gain a foothold by securing a crap path that could possibly be improved over time than to have no path at all. Not everyone agrees.

There are also issues with LAs inviting Sustrans to the table, ignoring everything they say and their published guidance, and then marking the route up with Sustrans signage!

My own approach is to support on multiple fronts: I support and volunteer with Sustrans for the soft-power diplomatic stuff, as well as practical action on a local level. But I also support my local cycle campaign https://newcycling.org/ for more idealist local lobbying and hardline criticism. And then Cycling UK for a national level lobbying.

Cugel wrote:

Another indicator that the notion of a seprate cycling infrastructure is itself "crap". Surely it would be a far better approach to spend money on making the existing road network much safer and more suitable for cycling and other uses besides that of King Car.

Unfortunately that's a losing battle. Even freshly-laid tarmac on my local roads (done properly, not just the usual patch/chip job) is breaking up rapidly. There's a brand new section near me that's going to be potholed to hell by the end of the winter - already subsiding and starting to crack. 

Maybe I notice it more because I'm riding but roads seemed to last longer when I was younger. I grew up on a heavily-used single carriageway and remember it being resurfaced when I was 8 or 9 years old (big diggers FTW!). That lasted until I was well into my thirties. Got relaid end to end (around a mile of surface) 5 years ago and its full of potholes.

Is it down to the increase in heavy traffic (delivery vans and the like) or is it pick-ups/SUVs/4x4s?

kil0ran wrote:

Even freshly-laid tarmac on my local roads (done properly, not just the usual patch/chip job) is breaking up rapidly. There's a brand new section near me that's going to be potholed to hell by the end of the winter - already subsiding and starting to crack. 

 

This is the problem in this country. It's clearly not done properly at any stage.

A couple of years ago I went to Germany with a mate to have a thrash on the Nurburgring and the roads over there are immaculate. Go back into Belgium and they're shit again, like the UK. Whatever the Germans do to construct a road is  'properly' done.

Yorkshire wallet wrote:

kil0ran wrote:

Even freshly-laid tarmac on my local roads (done properly, not just the usual patch/chip job) is breaking up rapidly. There's a brand new section near me that's going to be potholed to hell by the end of the winter - already subsiding and starting to crack. 

 

This is the problem in this country. It's clearly not done properly at any stage.

A couple of years ago I went to Germany with a mate to have a thrash on the Nurburgring and the roads over there are immaculate. Go back into Belgium and they're shit again, like the UK. Whatever the Germans do to construct a road is  'properly' done.

I cycle in NW England and also in West Wales (Sir Gar, Sir Benfro and Ceredigion). The difference in the quality of the road surfaces, as well as the level of activity to maintain them, is marked.

NW England generally has very poor roads and the limited maintenace that gets done is also poor. In West Wales the roads are far, far better overall; and the level of maintenance is much higher.

It's a common experience in West Wales to come across the Welsh traffic lights, surrounded by busy blokes doing an obviously professional job to fix a road. They've often been and gone in a couple of days. In NW England road repairs are encountered far less frequently. When you do find them, they often stay there for ages until the work's done; and the blokes doing it are obviously casual labour, not professionals, as witnessed by the almost immediate degradation to their work that occurs a few weeks after they've (eventually) departed the scene.

It is possible to fix roads well. They do so in West Wales. The problem seems to be that some Local Authorities are driven by an accountant (cheapest possible, probably outsourced to some cowboys) whilst other Local Authorities still have a public service ethos and get value for money, not cheapest bodge-job.

Cugel

Yorkshire wallet wrote:

kil0ran wrote:

Even freshly-laid tarmac on my local roads (done properly, not just the usual patch/chip job) is breaking up rapidly. There's a brand new section near me that's going to be potholed to hell by the end of the winter - already subsiding and starting to crack. 

 

This is the problem in this country. It's clearly not done properly at any stage.

A couple of years ago I went to Germany with a mate to have a thrash on the Nurburgring and the roads over there are immaculate. Go back into Belgium and they're shit again, like the UK. Whatever the Germans do to construct a road is  'properly' done.

In the UK we tend to use a lot of archaic road paving methods. The results are what they are because we use these old fashioned techniques. The Dutch are actually ahead of just about everyone when it comes to road building, though the Germans and French do indeed do some good work.

One issue I see all too frequently in the UK is road repairs being carried out in cold weather. It shouldn't be done if the temperature is below 5C as other wise the asphalt cools too quickly before you can compact it with a roller and therefore you don't get the air bubbles out and it'll break up quickly. Another problem is with the hot-cold joint, where you lay fresh asphalt alongside an existing bit of road pavement. Unless you treat that joint properly with a sealant, you'll get water ingress and then it'll crack up with the freeze thaw effect next tinme it gets cold.

kil0ran wrote:

Cugel wrote:

Another indicator that the notion of a seprate cycling infrastructure is itself "crap". Surely it would be a far better approach to spend money on making the existing road network much safer and more suitable for cycling and other uses besides that of King Car.

Or is it private contractors with no incentive to make the roads or repairs permanent. The repairs in my area are often no better than the pothole. Tarmac dumped as a big mound, often not filling the hole completely.

Unfortunately that's a losing battle. Even freshly-laid tarmac on my local roads (done properly, not just the usual patch/chip job) is breaking up rapidly. There's a brand new section near me that's going to be potholed to hell by the end of the winter - already subsiding and starting to crack. 

Maybe I notice it more because I'm riding but roads seemed to last longer when I was younger. I grew up on a heavily-used single carriageway and remember it being resurfaced when I was 8 or 9 years old (big diggers FTW!). That lasted until I was well into my thirties. Got relaid end to end (around a mile of surface) 5 years ago and its full of potholes.

Is it down to the increase in heavy traffic (delivery vans and the like) or is it pick-ups/SUVs/4x4s?