So if you cycle at 10mph, stay in 30 or 20mph zones. If you're doing
20, you should be OK on 40mph roads - and won't be welcome or as safe
on the shared path alongside.

So you're basically ruling out cycling on 90% of the country and
restricting cycles to urban areas.

While we're about it, why not exclude horses, tractors, mopeds, and
(god forbid) walkers from any country lane, after all, they are
designed for cars to do 60mph on.

iakobski wrote:
I wrote:
So if you cycle at 10mph, stay in 30 or 20mph zones. If you're doing
20, you should be OK on 40mph roads - and won't be welcome or as safe
on the shared path alongside.

So you're basically ruling out cycling on 90% of the country and
restricting cycles to urban areas.

Ouch. That hurt. But you snipped this bit:

A road layout that allows bikes to be overtaken with good clearance
without the driver changing lane is also safe, even with a greater
speed difference.

All I'm saying is that some situations that people find frightening
are not actually particularly dangerous.

Where motor vehicle speeds are high. sightlines are bad, and there
isn't always room to overtake a bike (e.g. when there's something
coming the other way), objectively there is more danger. You run a
risk of being hit by someone who can't stop between the time they see
you and the time they reach you. How high this risk is depends on
traffic density and driver behaviour.

While we're about it, why not exclude horses, tractors, mopeds, and
(god forbid) walkers from any country lane, after all, they are
designed for cars to do 60mph on.

What should happen about that risk is that drivers should be made to
slow down until it goes away.

In the meantime, some cyclists will accept the risk, and some won't.
If you don't like being endangered on the road, probably better to
ride in safer places. Like the A40 in Acton.

Colin McKenzie


--
The great advantage of not trusting statistics is that
it leaves you free to believe the damned lies instead!

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 20:40:41 +0100, Colin McKenzie
wrote:

A road layout that allows bikes to be overtaken with good clearance
without the driver changing lane is also safe, even with a greater
speed difference.

All I'm saying is that some situations that people find frightening
are not actually particularly dangerous.

Very true. As I posted earlier, the MK grid roads, with their
national speed limit and busy traffic, may seem frightening to some.
As it so happens, though, there is almost always space for a vehicle
to overtake a bicycle safely without conflicting with other traffic,
so it is actually not as dangerous as it may seem.

The roundabouts are probably the most dangerous bit - though this
isn't from traffic on the same or a similar path, as speeds are
suitably low that a bike isn't threatened by it on the roundabout.
The danger is from drivers approaching the roundabout with selective
vision - and this danger applies as much to those who seem not to see
articulated lorries until the last second either...

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.