On 13/10/2017 18:55, wrote:
In article , (Someone
Somewhere) wrote:

On 13/10/2017 14:37, wrote:
In article , (Someone
Somewhere) wrote:

On 13/10/2017 02:32, wrote:
In article ,
(GeorgeK) wrote:

Thank you all for your replies. My wife doesn't drive but we are
willing to live on the suburbs of Oxford provided that she can take
at least the bus to work which is at the city center. We are mainly
interested in living near a city with certain amenities (restaurants,
bars, shopping street, etc).

The idea of staying at Headington doesn't sound bad as it seems to be
less than 30min from the city center by bus. From your replies, it
seems that the 6th zone (Ickenham, Hillington or Rickmansworth) is
the closest I can get by car to London before being stuck in the jam.

When I checked the commute from Didcot to London by train it wasn't
faster (or cheaper) compared to Oxford. You reckon that Didcot would
be more convenient though?

Has you wife actually looked at the cycling option? Oxford is only
second to Cambridge for UK cycle commuting and up to 5 miles is an
easy cycle commute. My wife doesn't drive and regularly cycles to her
job 2.5-3 miles away as I did when working even though I drive.

The problem with relying on cyclng is that it's lovely when the
weather is, and when it isn't it's bloody horrible.

I live on what is allegedly one of the busiest cycle routes in the UK
and it's incredibly noticeable how usage drops when the weather is
less than clement.

Because of this I'd seriously argue that a modal shift to cycling is
impossible - you still have to dimension the transport infrastructure
for those bad days, and if you've just taken a chunk out of it to
accomodate the cycle lane then for periods of the year (e.g.
"February") you're actually making things worse, not better.

Sorry, but that is as ridiculous as saying you will drive even though
10% of the time traffic will be so bad that you will be seriously late
to work.

No it's not - it's observational that during poor weather (or winter)
the number of cyclists reduces dramatically. Do you dispute this?

Have you got the traffic counts? There appears to be much more traffic.
While a bit of that is cyclists using their cars but the main effect is
because cars are driving slower due to the conditions.

I mentioned a reduction in cyclists - not necessarily an increase in
cars - we have other modes of transport in London where people have
observed an increase in passengers during inclement weather.

Believe me, you don't want to go down the route of insisting I cite
evidence, otherwise you may find yourself asked for similar on each and
every contentious point you ever make.


Non-trivial rain occurs as commuter time well under 10% of the time. It
isn't that hard to get good cycling raingear either.

That's not the point, the point is cyclists seem fickle about the
weather but presumably will still make their journey which presumably
will be via tube / trian / taxi / uber / car.

Ones like contributors to this thread maybe. How many of you ever cycle?
Even since I retired I cycle regularly in central London. Sometimes it rains
too. Fortunately reality is becoming more apparent in places where cycling
is properly supported.

Does it matter who cycles or not? I work from home overlooking CS3
between Tower Hill and Canary Wharf. It is absolutely obvious that the
number of cyclists drops during bad weather.

You appear to be so blinkered about cycling to the point of implying I
am lying about what I see - is that really your intention?

In article , (Someone
Somewhere) wrote:

Does it matter who cycles or not? I work from home overlooking CS3
between Tower Hill and Canary Wharf. It is absolutely obvious that
the number of cyclists drops during bad weather.

You appear to be so blinkered about cycling to the point of implying
I am lying about what I see - is that really your intention?

You are so blinkered about cycling that you say it isn't a viable means of
transport when it's raining, despite telling us there are still lots of
cyclists when it rains, even if not as many as when it's dry. THAT'S what I
call irrational anti-cyclist prejudice.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 01:41:27
on Sun, 15 Oct 2017, remarked:
Does it matter who cycles or not? I work from home overlooking CS3
between Tower Hill and Canary Wharf. It is absolutely obvious that
the number of cyclists drops during bad weather.

You appear to be so blinkered about cycling to the point of implying
I am lying about what I see - is that really your intention?

You are so blinkered about cycling that you say it isn't a viable means of
transport when it's raining, despite telling us there are still lots of
cyclists when it rains, even if not as many as when it's dry. THAT'S what I
call irrational anti-cyclist prejudice.

It's not a hard cut-off when the rain reaches a specific intensity.
People make a range of decisions based on their own individual
circumstances. What matters is that rain *does* cause contingency plans
to kick in for many people, in a way it doesn't so much, if they are
using other forms of transport.

Thus cycling is *not* a one-size-fits-all solution.
--
Roland Perry

On 15/10/2017 07:41, wrote:
In article , (Someone
Somewhere) wrote:

Does it matter who cycles or not? I work from home overlooking CS3
between Tower Hill and Canary Wharf. It is absolutely obvious that
the number of cyclists drops during bad weather.

You appear to be so blinkered about cycling to the point of implying
I am lying about what I see - is that really your intention?

You are so blinkered about cycling that you say it isn't a viable means of
transport when it's raining, despite telling us there are still lots of
cyclists when it rains, even if not as many as when it's dry. THAT'S what I
call irrational anti-cyclist prejudice.


I did not see anything which amounted to a statement that cycling "isn't
a viable means of transport when it's raining".

Would you argue that my observation that the number of people in London
who walk to work falls when it rains shows my irrational,
anti-pedestrian prejudice?


--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

In message , at
10:13:57 on Sun, 15 Oct 2017, Robin remarked:

I did not see anything which amounted to a statement that cycling
"isn't a viable means of transport when it's raining".

It's not viable for everyone. I gave up cycling from home to the station
when I was living in Cambridge because there was nowhere to store
helmets and waterproofs at the station, and both my regular clothing and
'hand baggage' weren't expendable enough to get wet.
--
Roland Perry

On 15/10/2017 07:41, wrote:
In article , (Someone
Somewhere) wrote:

Does it matter who cycles or not? I work from home overlooking CS3
between Tower Hill and Canary Wharf. It is absolutely obvious that
the number of cyclists drops during bad weather.

You appear to be so blinkered about cycling to the point of implying
I am lying about what I see - is that really your intention?

You are so blinkered about cycling that you say it isn't a viable means of
transport when it's raining, despite telling us there are still lots of
cyclists when it rains, even if not as many as when it's dry. THAT'S what I
call irrational anti-cyclist prejudice.

I worked in an organisation in Cambridge where 'probably' the majority
cycled to work. I knew of nobody who changed their mode from cycling in
bad weather. {There is no such thing as bad weather only bad clothing} I
did have different shoes & sandals at work, and if it were raining hard
I'd take a spare pair of socks. Yes 'optional' trips by bike will drop
in bad weather. I'm now retired so would change shopping day if weather
bad. A higher percentage of trips than you might expect are optional. I
know from a previous job that congestion is worse on wet days, even in
towns/cities with few commuting by cycle (eg Sheffield). Getting
accurate data is difficult. I tried... Both the rain gauge and cycle
counter data I was given were clearly in error when closely examined.
Getting better data to repeat excercise is on my 'to do ' list.

Jim Chisholm wrote:
I worked in an organisation in Cambridge where 'probably' the majority
cycled to work. I knew of nobody who changed their mode from cycling in
bad weather. {There is no such thing as bad weather only bad clothing} I
did have different shoes & sandals at work, and if it were raining hard
I'd take a spare pair of socks. Yes 'optional' trips by bike will drop
in bad weather. I'm now retired so would change shopping day if weather
bad. A higher percentage of trips than you might expect are optional. I
know from a previous job that congestion is worse on wet days, even in
towns/cities with few commuting by cycle (eg Sheffield). Getting
accurate data is difficult. I tried... Both the rain gauge and cycle
counter data I was given were clearly in error when closely examined.
Getting better data to repeat excercise is on my 'to do ' list.

It's a bit easier these days because you can look at the detailed forecast
and the rain radar and say 'I'll go now before it rains' or 'I'll wait half
an hour for it to pass', in the same way you can look at live departure
boards before setting out and adjust your journey if there are delays.

Theo

In message , at 17:51:28 on Sun,
15 Oct 2017, Theo remarked:
I worked in an organisation in Cambridge where 'probably' the majority
cycled to work. I knew of nobody who changed their mode from cycling in
bad weather. {There is no such thing as bad weather only bad clothing} I
did have different shoes & sandals at work, and if it were raining hard
I'd take a spare pair of socks. Yes 'optional' trips by bike will drop
in bad weather. I'm now retired so would change shopping day if weather
bad. A higher percentage of trips than you might expect are optional. I
know from a previous job that congestion is worse on wet days, even in
towns/cities with few commuting by cycle (eg Sheffield). Getting
accurate data is difficult. I tried... Both the rain gauge and cycle
counter data I was given were clearly in error when closely examined.
Getting better data to repeat excercise is on my 'to do ' list.

It's a bit easier these days because you can look at the detailed forecast
and the rain radar and say 'I'll go now before it rains' or 'I'll wait half
an hour for it to pass', in the same way you can look at live departure
boards before setting out and adjust your journey if there are delays.

That assumes a degree of flexible working (and flexible family life)
which not everyone enjoys.
--
Roland Perry

On 15/10/2017 13:56, Jim Chisholm wrote:
On 15/10/2017 07:41, wrote:
In article , (Someone
Somewhere) wrote:

I worked in an organisation in Cambridge

And we're back talking about Cambridge again - this is uk.transport.LONDON

On 15/10/2017 07:41, wrote:
In article , (Someone
Somewhere) wrote:

Does it matter who cycles or not? I work from home overlooking CS3
between Tower Hill and Canary Wharf. It is absolutely obvious that
the number of cyclists drops during bad weather.

You appear to be so blinkered about cycling to the point of implying
I am lying about what I see - is that really your intention?

You are so blinkered about cycling that you say it isn't a viable means of
transport when it's raining, despite telling us there are still lots of
cyclists when it rains, even if not as many as when it's dry. THAT'S what I
call irrational anti-cyclist prejudice.

Well that will teach me to argue with the someone who I correctly called
out as blinkered - I never made a statement of that type, all I did was
state an observation that the number of cyclists on a particular route
(which, according to statistics, is the busiest in the UK) drops
dramatically during inclement weather.

For the record I am neither anti-cyclist (please cite where I said I
was, or even that I'm not a cyclist?) or irrational - the only
irrational person here appears to be someone else.