To wonder if cyclists should be made to use cycle lanes

[Notsureifthiswillworkasaname]

Especially where it is dangerous or slows down flowing traffic when they don't.
I am sure some places need more cycle lanes, but I am talking about stretches of road that have dedicated cycle lanes.
Cars have to use roads, pedestrians are expected to use pavements, so why can't cyclists be expected to use cycle lanes

And yes there will be cyclists who will flame this thread.

we have a local cycle lane that... does mean stopping at road junctions as it runs as part of a footpath

every other mode of transport accepts that at times it has to give way to other road users

er, you mean in your car (or on your horse or in the tractor) that you stop and give way at EVERY SINGLE ROAD junction, just like the cyclists have to on the adjacent lane. I would be fine about this, btw, if every single vehicle on the main road had to do it, too ... except it wouldn't make any sense because somebody has to take priority but why do bikes who use the path have to give way. What idiot thought that was appealing? Do you mean put in a RAB at every single junction for all approaching vehicles?

There is no ruddy way I'm wearing out my brakes & increasing my journey time just because someone designed a cycle lane for little kiddies & nervous cyclists, which is totally unsuitable for confident adults who can easily hit 15mph trying to get places.

What do you mean by 'where it is dangerous'? Dangerous because drivers are breaking the rules of the road and putting cyclists lives in danger?

And the argument about slowing down the flow of traffic isn't valid, unless you as a driver promise never ever to turn right, if it means holding up the traffic behind you, or reverse parking into a space if it means holding up the traffic.

Very few cycle lanes around me are fit for purpose. Some of them are little short stretches, where it is on balance, riskier to hop onto the cycle lane and then back onto the road when it runs out.

This is an example near why I live: The cycle lane runs for a short stretch along a road and then spits cyclists back onto the road at the exact point that drivers are turning left.
So if you use the cycle lane, you are immediately battling against cars who are about to pull across you and aren't expecting to see a cyclist appear there.
It is FAR safer to stay on the main carriageway and then get yourself into the correct lane. And that is before you take into account the potholes and broken glass...
www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4662218,-0.1890337,3a,19.3y,313.21h,84.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNqR-O0khGzwvqdtfl_Qn-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I actually have no problem slowing down for a few minutes and am generally a courteous driver, but it doesn't stop me thinking that some cyclists are really selfish and could at times be more aware of other road users themselves.

Thank you Wipe that is my perception of our cycle lanes.
And before this thread no overthehandlebars I hadn't seen complaints, otherwise I wouldn't have started the thread
and Seawood thanks for laying it out so clearly, interesting point about the women fatalities because as a woman I was wondering why not use the cycle lanes.

I think most cyclists would happily use cycle paths if they were (a) safe and (b) appropriately designed and maintained.

Most aren't. They are invariably designed by non-cyclists, and often poorly maintained. Or they are built for recreational cyclists rather than commuters - we have an excellent long-distance cycle path nearby that I use regularly for leisure rides, but which is useless for commuting (and in fairness to the local authorities, was not designed with commuting in mind).

If the UK invested in a cycle lane infrastructure like that in the Netherlands I would happily use them. Until then I wont.

And generally it is other cars which hold motorists up, not cyclists. The next time you're in a traffic jam, or a long queue for lights/roundabout have a look what's stretching infront of you. I bet it won't be a long queue of cycles.

I did a 40 mile bike ride at the weekend. Average speed of 18mph and hit speeds of 35mph at times. Bollocks would I do that on cycle paths. Not that there were any cycle paths along any of the roads I cycled on.

I cycled in denmark recently. Fantastic cycle lanes entirely separated from the main road, properly thought out and well designed. There, i used them. Here i wont even cycle, it is too dangerous.

There is no ruddy way I'm wearing out my brakes & increasing my journey time

Why not? You expect multiple car users to do instead?

Person A decides to ride his bike down the main road where there are no opportunities to pass. This is to stop him being delayed or having to pay attention at junctions on the cycle lane provided and saves him 5 minutes.

Cars B, C, D and Bus E, Van F are all following and cant overtake and they contain a total of 30 people, these have all been delayed by 5 minutes.

wanker undertaking as a cyclist isn't illegal at all. If can certainly be dangerous and I rarely do it.

If there is a really long queue for a junction I might do it for half the queue. Otherwise if I just take my place in the queue when the queue moves 15 cars will overtake me, then we stop again for the lights and repeat. It could take me 20 light changes to get to the junction and it would be taking the cars two light changes. So yes I might initially legally undertake but as I got closer to the junction I wouldn't as don't went to put myself in danger.

wanker
Until all cars are banned from turning right across the flow of traffic, then the argument about holding people up for a few minutes is a total non sequitur. We accept on our road systems that you may be delayed for a few minutes to allow someone else to make their journey.

Your example essentially comes down to some philosophical belief that the time of people in cars is somehow more valuable than the time of people on bikes, and therefore bikes have no right to cost car passengers time.

and the cycle lanes that just stop - leaving you on the wrong side of the traffic and nowhere else to go. I have one just like that near me - I wonder why I never use it

wanker. One car overtaking a cyclist may be delayed by a couple of mins while ensuring its safe to overtake. The same as if overtaking a slower car.

If the cyclist used a cycle path they might literally have to stop every 20 yards for driveways and side roads. Would you really do a 10 mile journey where you can't get any speed up due to people in cars coming out of driveways and you having to do emergency stops to avoid hitting them?

That's what the cycle path on my commute is like. The houses all have high walls surrounding them so I can't see a car in their drive. The cycle path is a two way one but isn't wide enough for two bikes to pass. Oh and it comes to an abrupt stop in the middle of nowhere half a mile before my village and Id have to try and cross a busy A road to carry on cycling on the road. I'm better off just starting on the road. Plus a five mile section of it is gravel which is slow going and you get punctures.

If the UK invested in a cycle lane infrastructure like that in the Netherlands I would happily use them. Until then I wont.

This. I used to be a regular cyclist. My sister was, too. She was seriously injured on 2 separate occasions - one hit and run, and one where she was trying to negotiate potholes & roadworks on the cyclepath.

I completely forgot i was actually run over on a cycle lane by some tosser who turned right across my path. He thought he had right of way over cycle lanes. Dickhead.

And 90% of cars I see have one person in so that voids your arguement about 30 people been delayed.

Maybe those people should get out their cars and cycle to work instead? I know, some people will be too old, infirm, etc but the majority of people could stop using the car so much.

Less pollution, less congestion.

Cyclists shouldn't have to brake at places where cars heading down the same road in the same direction do not. Cyclists should brake at same places where cars have to. Not asking for privilege at all, just parity. The cycle lanes could be designed to take priority over the cross traffic where the main road has such priority. Danish/Dutch cycle lanes do this, btw.

Your cyclist A who is holding up cars BCD & Bus E: should he drive down the road slowly instead in his tractor? Or in a car slowly towing a horse box. I bet you really fancy overtaking the tractor. He's perfectly entitled to drive either vehicle down there, after all!

FWIW, I learnt to drive in another country where you have to pull in & let vehicles pass if you are holding up 5+ other vehicles because of your slow speed. This law applies if you're in a any type of vehicle (or on a push bike). So I do things like pull in to let faster traffic past; I do this even in my car if I am not driving like local maniacs (Welsh rural drivers, I'm looking at you). Not my fault Britain hasn't brought in such a sensible law.

I saw an idea for a cycling awareness campaign suggesting that all London cyclists should have a "no cycling" protest against impatient drivers. So instead of cycling, all cyclists would drive to work for the day instead.

I think that is an amazing, if impractical, idea. It would clearly demonstrate to people exactly how much cyclists "slow them down" if every single cyclist they see was replaced by another car in front of them queuing for the next set of lights. The city would grind to a stand still.

It's a pity it would never happen. And also a bit off topic. But worth thinking about, if you are the sort of person who gets frustrated being stuck behind a bike for a few minutes.

Because they're usually shit. There's one near me where cyclists are instructed by the markings to give way to a tree.

Also, see www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.uk/facility-of-the-month/

Nearly always trot this photo out of my local cycle path on these threads.

Op, look through all those photos on that brilliant link from Breke and you will never again wonder why cyclists dont use cycle lanes

So even if all those vehicles have one person in then that is still more people delayed by one so your argument is void.

Why should the whole country get out and cycle just because it makes your life easier? Some people might be put off cycling for safety issues and lack of facilities, I totally agree, but other people just don't want to. Maybe they have stuff they need to transport, maybe they work a long distance away, maybe they have no suitable storage for bikes, maybe they just don't have time.

I know there are faults on both sides, I see some idiot drivers, but the attitude that some cyclists have that they are righteous and perfect and are not sometimes selfish and idiotic does my head in.

And don't even get me started on the fecking mess they get the hill in with mountain biking.

Sanfairy I am looking

When you criticise cyclists for not using a "cycle path" do you you mean a separate off-road path for cyclists and pedestrians, a shared use pavement indicated by the odd sign half way up a lampost or just a bit of paint and a dotted line at the side of the road?

OP, what do you mean by you never hear cyclists moaning about cycle paths? On here? In general life?

If you are not a cyclist you probably won't hear much because it's not something of interest to most people. But if you did pay attention you would see lots of talk about cycle lanes and how ineffective they are. Particularly grandiose £££ schemes that don't achieve anything like they set out to do, other than providing a sop for local authorities/the government to say they are thinking of cyclists really.

But what I really don't get about these threads is why cyclists seem to annoy drivers so much. It seems inbuilt to the psyche of many drivers to get pissed off by the mere presence of a bike in the road. I drive more than I cycle these days and I very rarely get delayed by cyclists at all, even though sometimes it may seem like you do. On a road near my house which is uphill and narrow you can get a line of traffic during rush hour because it's too tight when there are lots of cars coming the other way. Drivers often seem to get very angry at this (even though there's no cycle lane so the cyclist doesn't even have that option). But the key thing here is that it's during rush hour. So when you do get past the bike all that happens is you end up queuing at the next set of lights anyway (and then the bike catches you up). Out of rush hour it's easier to overtake because there isn't the traffic coming the other way so you're not delayed.