The only times I've fallen off my bike it's been a combination of going too fast around tight corners with either crushed leaves or mud on the ground. As mentioned above these situations can be avoided by a) going at a sensible speed b) clearing of paths and c) avoiding building tracks with tight corners
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Why don't you cycle?
- Thread starter Ghostbus
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
I am 79 years of age and every week, I attend an NHS clinic to have both legs redressed by the district nurse. I now live on my own since the death of my wife in 2021, have had numerous falls at home and am unsteady at times and currently prone to spells of dizziness. If I were to cycle on the public highway, I would pose a problem for other road users.
That sounds like a very genuine reason, other than the many reasons which are nothing more than poor excuses (I am not singling anyone out here, but pointing out the many poor excuses given like rain, snow, needing to carry a months worth of shopping etc).
I am not saying everyone should cycle, or cycle all the time. I'm a firm believer of having multiple options so you can choose the best option at any given moment (walking, cycling, bus, car, train, plane, ship, space shuttle..).
No one is forcing people to cycle. Especially in the UK!
The argument of unused/underused cycling infrastructure pops up in my local area too. In Canterbury, cycling infrastructure is poor or non-existent. A lovely (imo) bit of segregated cycling infrastructure was installed recently, but as it doesn’t connect to any other cycling infrastructure, it’s not exactly well used (to my knowledge). Of course the local Facebook group gets all dramatic about it (waste of money, should stop making it ‘hard’ for car drivers etc). It does seem pointless having decent cycling infrastructure that then suddenly ends, forcing cyclists into a narrow roadway only suitable for the most experienced cyclists, but I see it as sensible planning for the future, which I don’t think is often done in the UK. If more cycling infrastructure is installed later, it will work well if connected up to existing infrastructure, and less costly or disruptive if all installed at once.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
It sounds like you indeed should not cycle - there will be a fair few people who for various medical reasons should not.
However, most people can and probably should - and if they did there'd be less traffic congestion for your car or bus!
None of the above answers fit me
A combination of where I live
I am a driver but am not against cyclists (those near me seem generally very good) but this has no bearing on me not cycling, it just doesn't suit my lifestyle
A combination of where I live
- A lot of hills
- Many places are either within walking distance or designed for the car or public transport
- Great public transport
I am a driver but am not against cyclists (those near me seem generally very good) but this has no bearing on me not cycling, it just doesn't suit my lifestyle
The cycling lobby actually puts people off cycling. By demanding cycle paths etc they are shouting "its dangerous" and by demanding showers and lockers at work they are instilling this idea that you can't just come as you are and go slower - you don't shower if you walk, only if you run, so why shower if you pootle in rather than power in?
And really need to put a lid on the helmet stuff (see what I did there!). You don't attract people to something by constantly telling them its so dangerous you need a helmet.
And really need to put a lid on the helmet stuff (see what I did there!). You don't attract people to something by constantly telling them its so dangerous you need a helmet.
I reckon you're talking about two (perhaps three) distinct sets of people. Those serious enough to ask for showers at work are probably using roads and don't need cycle lanes. And I reckon most people who are bothered about helmets don't cycle at all.
Besides - if you're showering every day anyway why not do so after you cycle - and use work's hot water?
One point overlooked is that cycle infrastructure isn't just good for safety - if done right it should be quicker to use than the road.
Blackpool boy
On Moderation
Whats wrong with wanting to have showers at your workplace? Be that for cyclists or even people who want to pop out for a run during their dinner break?
Encouraging people to look after their health and providing the infrastructure for them to take it up benefit the company greatly by having a healthier workforce and should ideally lead to less time off work through various illnesses.
Cat Lechat
Member
"So why shower if you pootle in rather than power in?" Because some of us are sweaty Betties who sweat even if we pootle, no matter the level of fitness!
I think anyone who complains about 'the cycling lobby' putting people off by demanding cycle lanes has had a very different experience of cycling than I have. I've had someone get out of a car to start a fight with me after I yelled "Mirror, signal, and THEN manoeuvre!" at someone who pulled out without looking and led to me skidding across the road as I braked to avoid hitting them. (I presume they were worried that I nearly scratched their car in my skid, as I really don't see what grounds they had for being angry enough to try and start a fight after they'd completely caused the incident.) I've also seen collisions caused by similar incidents and I know quite a lot of people who commute by bike regularly, and only know two who haven't been involved in collisions that weren't their fault that would be avoided by safe infrastructure . Admittedly they'd also be avoided by the drivers in question looking properly, but there's always going to be some nutters who don't
I think anyone who complains about 'the cycling lobby' putting people off by demanding cycle lanes has had a very different experience of cycling than I have. I've had someone get out of a car to start a fight with me after I yelled "Mirror, signal, and THEN manoeuvre!" at someone who pulled out without looking and led to me skidding across the road as I braked to avoid hitting them. (I presume they were worried that I nearly scratched their car in my skid, as I really don't see what grounds they had for being angry enough to try and start a fight after they'd completely caused the incident.) I've also seen collisions caused by similar incidents and I know quite a lot of people who commute by bike regularly, and only know two who haven't been involved in collisions that weren't their fault that would be avoided by safe infrastructure . Admittedly they'd also be avoided by the drivers in question looking properly, but there's always going to be some nutters who don't
Last edited:
Trouble is those who want showers lead the appeals, which gives the idea to non-cyclists that you need to shower - which puts people off (anecdata but one of my bosses used that as an excuse as he didn't want to have to do his hair again!!).
The best way to improve safety is numbers - get more cyclists on the road so its normal for drivers to account for them. Its hard to get numbers when you are giving a strong impression that cycling to work is like going to the gym except very dangerous.
Meaningful cycling provision in our old towns is very difficult - it ends up being bitty and as soon as you stop being scared it is really slow.....winding round obstacles, pedestrians and dogs everywhere, and even if you theoretically have priority over side turnings its too unreliable not to slow down.
I ride five miles to work. I don't need a shower when I arrive. In a heatwave, I leave slightly earlier and ride more slowly.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
That's not the case in Cardiff. The traffic lights often ignore me, and the bike lane is full of leaves. I usually ride on the bus lane.
Doctor Fegg
Established Member
You must know an entirely different cycle lobby to the one I know. Most cycle campaigners are neutral at best on helmets - as many will point out, everyday cyclists don't wear helmets in the Netherlands - and fairly unfussed about showers. They are agitated about safe infrastructure where you're not going to get killed by drivers, and rightly so.
YouLostAStar
Member
How is rain, snow, shopping poor examples?
If its raining that impairs not only my visibility but the drivers who i'm relying on seeing me and not hitting me. I also need to carry more spare clothes for the cycle home which takes up bag space.
I've yet to cycle in the snow and that will 100% be a day when I get the bus instead. It would make my journey take longer and be more likely to have an accident and thats a no from me.
As for shopping, thats going to depend on the person, I do a big shop online and only do top up shops on my commute but whatever I get from the shops needs to fit in my bag, if its raining that bag is more full with spare clothes
The helmet thing was intended to be general rather than continue the point about the cycling lobby.
Thinking more about government media and the Highway Code, plus stories about reduced insurance payouts, and pressure put on the media to use photos with cyclists wearing helmets.
I have cycled to work in the snow. It took twice as long as normal but still faster than walking. No chance of taking the bus. They didn't run for two days. Little chance of getting hit by a motor vehicle. There were hardly any about and they were going more slowly than me!
YouLostAStar
Member
My local bus route goes along a main road between 2 cities so takes a lot to get that cancelled. If it gets that bad then I wouldn't have thought anyone would be getting into work where I am
BingMan
Member
- Joined
- 8 Feb 2019
- Messages
- 561
And bright clothing and special shoes.
For me if I can't cycle in my normal outdoor gear the I won't bother
The only concession I make to special gear is a lanyard to keep my hat safe
Tetragon213
Member
The list equipment that some cycling groups hawk on about is absolutely mad. Pink Floyd lights, front-rear-up-down-left-right cameras, ultra-hi-viz, the list goes on.
When I rode a sodding 50cc scooter, I just had a full-face helmet, my dad's old "Luckies" jacket, and a pair of good gloves. 3 bits which (between them) fit handily inside the underseat storage and back box with room to spare. Technically speaking it was recommended that hi-viz and special trousers be used, but I never had an issue with just using extremely good quality "normal" jeans.
I still miss that scooter. Sadly, the oil pump went kaput without anyone noticing, and by the time I got it into the shop, the damage was beyond economical repair! It was fun while it lasted. Actually kinda tempted to pull the trigger on going for an A2 license.
The only people I see expressing opinions on cyclists clothing is drivers in local Facebook groups complaining about riders wearing dark clothing.
I have in the past reminded them that while cyclists must use lights at night, they are free to wear whatever they want.
Personally I stick on a high-vis jacket to keep warm and so nobody can use the "he's wearing dark clothes" excuse if they hit me.
I have in the past reminded them that while cyclists must use lights at night, they are free to wear whatever they want.
Personally I stick on a high-vis jacket to keep warm and so nobody can use the "he's wearing dark clothes" excuse if they hit me.
I don't really care what others think and cycle wearing what I want, which is a hi-vis and helmet if I'm cycling at speed or on a main road, and I'll be just as I am for a leisurely cycle to the shops (which I rarely do as I fear my bike will be nicked or I need to remove lights etc). As I said before, theft or vandalism is probably high up on the list of reasons not to cycle.
As a driver, I do wish cyclists on the road would have something reflecting clothing wise, especially when more than half won't have lights at night and seem to ride reliant on street lighting or other car headlights to see. Ignoring the law part, some people have no care for their own safety. I then have to look out even harder for them.
As a driver, I do wish cyclists on the road would have something reflecting clothing wise, especially when more than half won't have lights at night and seem to ride reliant on street lighting or other car headlights to see. Ignoring the law part, some people have no care for their own safety. I then have to look out even harder for them.
Falcon1200
Established Member
When I cycle I do wear hi-vis clothing, for my own safety, because I have seen many cyclists in dark clothing who are very hard to see, in poor lighting, and also in bright sunlight with shade-dappled patches.
YouLostAStar
Member
the Cameras is probably the main thing I agree cyclists need. So many drivers go so close to you when overtaking that I'm very tempted to buy a gopro to record them and report them
Its in the Highway Code and all advice isnt it, which gives the drivers the excuse for complaining?
Personally I think utility cyclists should be free to come as they are, but what did my nut was the MAMILs who have spent loads of money on gear and actively chosen to buy black outfits. In summer in heavily wooded Surrey the shade under the trees is effectively night dark as you adjust from the bright sunlight, so keeping track of some skinny bloke all in black on a skinny bike is somewhat taxing. At least the sensible ones have a rear light on all the time.
johncrossley
Established Member
Do the police actually take any notice? I'm tempted to film cars parked on cycle paths - would the police be interested in that?
Round here the police like to park their speed camera van on the cycle paths. Adjacent to, but segregated from, the main carriageway. Preferably under a road direction sign for camouflage.
YouLostAStar
Member
I know of someone who had to pay a fine or go on a course recently because of a cyclist submitted footage of them passing too close so somehow there's definitely a way to report them to and the police will deal with it.
I'm guessing because they can actually make some money out of it otherwise they probably wouldn't care
Tetragon213
Member
From the gov...
Rule 59
Clothing.
You should avoid clothes that may get tangled in the chain, or in a wheel or may obscure your lights when you are cycling.
Light-coloured or fluorescent clothing can help other road users to see you in daylight and poor light, while reflective clothing and/or accessories (belt, arm or ankle bands) can increase your visibility in the dark.
You should wear a cycle helmet that conforms to current regulations, is the correct size and securely fastened. Evidence suggests that a correctly fitted helmet will reduce your risk of sustaining a head injury in certain circumstances.
The Highway Code suggests wearing light and/or fluorescent clothing, but stops short of mandating making it possible to see the cyclist through light clothing. Personally, I think it should be mandated that one should be wearing something which the reasonable man would consider to be visible at 20m, if one is to cycle at night. In theory, this should already have been taken care of by...
Rule 60
At night your cycle MUST have white front and red rear lights lit. It MUST also be fitted with a red rear reflector (and amber pedal reflectors, if manufactured after 1/10/85). White front reflectors and spoke reflectors will also help you to be seen. Flashing lights are permitted but it is recommended that cyclists who are riding in areas without street lighting use a steady front lamp.
However, this rule is very poorly enforced; I've lost track of how many idiots I've seen at night with no lights or reflectors on their bikes, dressed like a ninja in all-black on the streets. One wonders if they are simply daft making themselves as difficult as possible to spot at night, or if perhaps they have less-than-honest intentions behind making themselves as stealthy as possible.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
It does - lights. Which these days are mostly as bright as car lights - nobody uses an Ever Ready set with those flat 4.5V batteries any more.
If that isn't enough for you as a driver to see one, best give up driving or at least have an eye test.
(I do get fed up of stealth cyclists without lights, though!)