Someone please explain to me the mindset of this cyclist

cyclopath2001

breadmonkey wrote:

What actually happened was I thought I'd leave you to mumble among yourselves about the state of cycle lanes..

Can you tell us what you believe to be the answer to your question?

I'd be interested to know your opinion, as a civil engineering student, of the standard of construction of 'cycle-facilities' and their fitness for purpose.

jman0

breadmonkey wrote:

What actually happened was I thought I'd leave you to mumble among yourselves about the state of cycle lanes..

yeah, i second what cyclopath2001 said.
How come you don't address any of the issues people raised that are relevant to your OP?
Instead here you are taking a dig at us, how immature.

tywy

what do you expect, OP is a civil engineer...civil engineering - the arts of engineering :P

breadmonkey

Look, I asked a question, people said the cycle lanes were too dangerous, I pointed out that this particular stretch of cycle lane was not and then someone came on and said it was one of the worst stretches in Dublin. That is simply not true. I have cycled it many many times myself and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. There is no point in continuing the discussion. I accept that some cycle lanes are disasterous and that in general, a cyclist is probably in the bus lane because of that fact.

DirkVoodoo

Yeah, they shuffle the blue & yellow railings around every so often, som days cycle track is open, some days cyclists must dismount, some days cycle track open....but most days there is no one there working!

ruprect

breadmonkey wrote:

I have cycled it many many times myself and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

What are our colleges teaching these civil engineers?? Those photos shown could be in a textbook of what not to do.

cyclopath2001

breadmonkey wrote:

Look, I asked a question, people said the cycle lanes were too dangerous, I pointed out that this particular stretch of cycle lane was not

I think cyclists have lost confidence in the ability of engineers to design useful cycle facilities. Nobody wants to enter a cycle track, when there's a good chance that after some distance, it will disappear or turn into something else. This may explain why tracks that are apparently good ones such as the one mentioned by the OP are ignored.

We hear a lot about engineering being a profession and its adherence to laws, specifications and standards being essential to safe construction.

Unfortunately, these high standards do not apply to the construction of cycle tracks. Much work has to be done before by road engineers to win back the trust of cyclists.

breadmonkey

ruprect wrote:

What are our colleges teaching these civil engineers?? Those photos shown could be in a textbook of what not to do.

I'll tell you, absolutely nothing, because it is totally irrelevant at an undergraduate level. The fact that I study Civil Eng (and am in desperate need of work over Christmas:) ) has nothing to do with this.

RainyDay

breadmonkey wrote:

someone came on and said it was one of the worst stretches in Dublin. That is simply not true. I have cycled it many many times myself and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

So you reckon the photos from Blorg are fakes?

cast_iron

The section in question is only about a mile on from the section i described earlier. Comparing these two, the one with the photographs is like a motorway, the other a back road.

Yes, the stretch is not perfect but i've seen ALOT worse.

What the "non-engineers" among us know is what is uncomfortable. They are not experts in the design, so do not see the reason for all the little turns and rises in track. The main fact in putting a cycle track in is the cost. The engineer could design a perfect cycle track, but the council will notfinance any such thing. So the engineer works with what he has got. That's his job.

The engineer does not set out to put as mant obstacles as possibe.

Sadly the problem is probably down to a couple of factors - lazy engineers design, because he is stuck in a nice cushy job for life with the council in question. Also the budget allocated to cycle tracks. And lazy contractors who do the surfacing. The engineers do not put the final surface down - which is what we all feel, so what effects us most.

Bunnyhopper

breadmonkey wrote:

What actually happened was I thought I'd leave you to mumble among yourselves about the state of cycle lanes..

I actually find that quite rude. I tried to give what I hoped was a considered and polite response to what I thought was a reasonable question on your part. I think a lot of the other responses that you've got on here have been polite and thoughtful. In some cases people have taken issue with your position but have gone to considerable lengths to give detailed explanations as to why they feel that way. To respond simply that you were leaving us to "mumble" amongst ourselves reflects badly on you and is insulting to the other posters on here.

blorg

cast_iron - I presume the "worse" section you are talking about is the downhill between Mount Merrion avenue and Foster's Avenue? It is indeed chronic and I will concede worse (being downhill doesn't help cycling on it.) On the plus side though that downhill generally allows you to outpace buses if you choose not to use it. I have been threatened by buses (overtake too close and swerve in) on that very section, and I know I am not the only one.

hunnymonster

I'm going to start by saying I know absoutely nothing about time-and-motion, engineering or even politics but what would be the effect of the following.


Suppose Ireland developed a complete transport network with spearation of bike and car (and maybe bus). Parts of Holland and Germany are like this and, while I don't know the statistics, it appears to work extremely well. There are some roads used only by cars, some by bikes and some by buses (though most of the buses have been replaced by trams or similar in cities in Germany). Would it
(a) bring cities to a standstill? Or might it just improve the flow of traffic as roads would only be contending with "like".
(b) be safer?

Am I just being naive beyond belief?

BTW, I had to drive today as I was bringing someone (complete with bike box) to the airport. The buses and taxi's won't take the box so we went by car. Anyway the no 13A bus on nassau street tried to kill me :-) Glad to see the Dublin bus drivers don't just want to send me to heaven when I'm on a bike!

source

cast_iron wrote:

And lazy contractors who do the surfacing. The engineers do not put the final surface down - which is what we all feel, so what effects us most.

You can't blame the contractors they only lay the surface the engineers have decided on.

You think cycle lanes in Dublin are bad, come down here to Limerick, IF you can find the few that we have you're bound to have a bad day if you decide to use them. there are onroad lanes which are too narrow,off road lanes which are crowded with pedestrians who'll tell you what to do with yourself if you point out that it is a cycle lane, and the piece de resistance lanes which only appear at roundabouts in an effort to keep cyclists off the roundabout which is fine and safe, only problem is if you want to take any exit apart from the one you're facing you have to continue in the wrong direction for a few mins turn around at a pedestrian crossing and come back. Try to imagine what wanting to take the third exit would entail.

Victor

cast_iron wrote:

The engineer does not set out to put as mant obstacles as possibe.

No, its worse than that. They are oblivious to such obstacles.

roadmanmad

To rebervert to the starting thread.

The mind of a cyclist is very simple.

Give me a good road, and I am happy - particularly when it has been designed and preferably built by a cyclist and oblivious motorists have been removed.

Problems start at that point.

Kingsize

breadmonkey wrote:

I have cycled it many many times myself and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Just wondering,When you've been out cycling on it have you ever noticed any motorists breaking the rules of the road & felt compelled to start a thread here about it?
That Guy really ruined your day didn't he??

I'm not familiar with the stretch of cycle lane but if its anything like the one I use (Santry) there are so many interchanges between road/path/buslane & cycle lane that it's easy to be cycling illegally & not even realise(e.g. Cycle lane is on the path then suddenly dissapears & re appears at random)
so it's easier / safer to stay on the road.

If you cycle regularly in Dublin you soon realise the rules of the road can be distilled into one simple rule "Don't get Killed"

ruprect

Originally Posted by ruprect
What are our colleges teaching these civil engineers?? Those photos shown could be in a textbook of what not to do.

breadmonkey wrote:

I'll tell you, absolutely nothing, because it is totally irrelevant at an undergraduate level. The fact that I study Civil Eng (and am in desperate need of work over Christmas:) ) has nothing to do with this.

I would believe they do not teach design of roads/cycletracks in college. But as a student of civil engineering I would imagine you have some interest in such areas and would be able to recognise what is good & poor design, and good & bad implementation (I doubt the design engineers instructed them to put 1" kerbs all along cycle tracks where they meet peoples driveways).
The fact you study civil eng does have something to do with this. If you are studying civil engineering, you obviously must have some intelligence to get to that point. You should also have some interest in such things.

I have a degree in mechanical engineering, I was never taught about cars in college yet many people think I should know about them, I was never taught how to fix a video yet people ask me to have a look at such broken devices for them, as I am assumed to have a knack for such things.

You don't have to be formally trained in a discipline to recognise obvious flaws in designs. But to be formally trained in an area yet be totally oblivious to problems in designs somewhat related to that subject is a bit strange. You are not doing yourself any favours in marketing yourself for a job. In many engineering job interviews I went to they may ask you real life questions, asking for possible problems & solutions. This is to weed out the purely academic people who havent a notion or interest in their field, just went into it "coz they got the points", all they can do is pass exams in the subject, mostly mathematically based subjects.

I am suspect as to whether you do actually cycle on that stretch, I think you were just saying it to bolster your argument that it is a good lane. Do you really think it is as comfortable & easy & safe (excluding homicidal bus men) to cycle on it as it is on the road beside it?

cast_iron

foinse wrote:

You can't blame the contractors they only lay the surface the engineers have decided on.

It's not what you do, it's how you do it. In every job, quality of contractors work varies quite largely.
I'm not arguing against the surface chosen - just the way they lay it.

pokypoky

ok havent read this entire thread but regarding stupid cycle paths theres one in particular that really angers me to the max. Theres a cycle path there on the way to shankhill on a hill.

Now if u think about what could be the most stupid thing one could possibly put on a cycle path, I'd probably say to u hmmm got to be speed bumps....hahaha, but the laughter died a quick death when cycling up this brand new path on a wet windy day. Speed bumps on a cycle path, hillarious, unless u happen to be cycling on said cycle path which is equally dangerous going uphill as down. Not only that but this stretch also features an exciting obstacle course of randomly inserted poles and ridiculously high curbs.

What a joke

stanbowles

thanks to breadmonkey for prompting such a useful discussion of cycletracks with some excellent contributions from blorg etc.

As a semiregular bike commuter who uses the N11 stretch from Leopardstown to Cherrywood, I have to agree with the consensus opinion about how poorly designed most of this bikelane is. The only stretch outbound that I use is that between where the old drive in AIB used to be and Cabinteely village exit. The rest is either drive way rodeo, glass strewn or dangerous. Inbound from Cherrywood, I hate having to use the first long stretch of clayred cycle track because the surface is invariably full of glass and debris but car/ taxi / bus speeds make it a sorry necessity. There is one decent stretch more or less opposite the decent stretch on the other side mentioned above. Around Foxrock church is really just a joke ... the surface is disintegrating, glass before and after busshelter, weird chicane to avoid busshelter which feeds you most of the time into other busqueuers. For this reason and because my commute ends in Terenure via Sandyford Ind Estate, I have just given up using this stretch of biketrack altogether and cycle up through the posh Foxrock roads instead.

A few quick points as I'm rambling
1/ The N11 may be bad but other cyclepaths in Dublin are even worse (Ter/Rathfarnham to Churchtown).
2/ NOBODY MAINTAINS THEM. They are not swept of glass, debris. EVER.
3/ There is only one decent surface for cycletrack, imo, and it is smooth tarmac not that terrible mottled clayred bumpy stuff or any of the other, submaintained varieties. The ONE bit of decent, ie cycleable, cycletrack in Dublin that I know - around Cabinteely - has been laid with this surface....
4/ ... and does not have frequent, abrupt rise and falls for driveways ... think about the folly of it: where there are houses, drives, exits out onto roads, the cyclepaths - eg. on the horrible stretch between Sandyford Ind Estate and Leopardstown/N11 junction) are designed primarily to avoid minimal inconvenience to residents by smoothing their car exit onto the road over the cyclepath while inconveniencing maximally the much higher volume of cyclists who use the cyclepath as a thoroughfare by making them / us all do the driveway rodeo
5/ I suspect that breadmonkey may be using a mountainbike or something with decent, thick tyres. If my assumption is correct, then I'd agree that most of the N11 stretch is cyclable, not pleasant though, and certainly not as safe or fast as cycling the buslane. For the other contributors with a faster road bike or with higher spec commuting hybrids and thin wheels, then in general cyclepaths are generally a nuisance, source of frustration and punctures.

... as a motorist I don't expect to be compelled to drive over beds of nails

Finally, some positive suggestions: 1/ maintain, sweep existing cycletracks on a regular basis 2/ upgrade and use common smooth tarmac surface for all tracks, 3/ design tracks for cyclists, not as an ecological penance and an inconvenience for local residents. Make people want to cycle on them.

If the authorities can't be bothered to do the above, then they should rip the whole 'network' up and give up the pretence that they have any interest in encouraging people to get out of their cars.

Stan

breadmonkey

There have been several comments directed at me. I really couldn't tbe bothered to quote them all but I have to say that I agree that thre are certain cycle tracks that are abismal but the one in question is absolutely fine. I have cycled it many times on a racer and a mountain bike. Anyway, I have taken what I can from this thread and realise that cyclists are often put in danger by poorly designed cycle tracks

I still believe, however, that in the situation described in my OP, the cyclist was at fault no matter what way you look at it.

Bunnyhopper

breadmonkey wrote:

There have been several comments directed at me. I really couldn't tbe bothered to quote them all but I have to say that I agree that thre are certain cycle tracks that are abismal but the one in question is absolutely fine. I have cycled it many times on a racer and a mountain bike. Anyway, I have taken what I can from this thread and realise that cyclists are often put in danger by poorly designed cycle tracks

I still believe, however, that in the situation described in my OP, the cyclist was at fault no matter what way you look at it.

Why start a thread (particularly one called "Someone please explain to me the mindset of this cyclist") when you "really couldn't be bothered" to respond to the points made by other posters? The quality of thought in your posts has been pretty poor compared to the other responses on here: it seems to me that while others have given detailed explanations of their positions you have simply repeated your original point without ever deigning to respond in any useful detail to the points put to you.

I began reading this thread with an open mind. I don't know the stretch of cyclepath that's under discussion, but I do know that the arguments made by other posters have been more detailed, more thoughtful, more evidence-based and ultimately more convincing than your points. You feel that this track is "absolutely fine," and yet I've read some excellent posts here, and even seen some photographs, that strongly suggest the contrary.

You're insisting, in the face of some very particular objections (to which you have offered no particular rebuttal), that this cyclist was "at fault", but you still haven't even really explained why he was annoying you so much or what you think his mindset was, never mind why you think he deserved to have a whole thread devoted to him.

Do you really think your posts will convince anyone that you have a valid point to make? I was and remain willing to listen but you really don't seem to have much to say that's worth listening to.

Membrane

pokypoky wrote:

ok havent read this entire thread but regarding stupid cycle paths theres one in particular that really angers me to the max. Theres a cycle path there on the way to shankhill on a hill.

Now if u think about what could be the most stupid thing one could possibly put on a cycle path, I'd probably say to u hmmm got to be speed bumps....hahaha, but the laughter died a quick death when cycling up this brand new path on a wet windy day. Speed bumps on a cycle path, hillarious, unless u happen to be cycling on said cycle path which is equally dangerous going uphill as down. Not only that but this stretch also features an exciting obstacle course of randomly inserted poles and ridiculously high curbs.

What a joke

I know the bit of 2 way cycle lane you are referring to. Having only used it going towards the City (thus going uphill) the stupidity of those speed bumps specifically designed for bicycles is indeed baffling.

I guess that the intent is to get cyclists going downhill in the other direction to drag their brakes so that their speed doesn't become a risk to the pedestrians that share the kerb with cyclists. There is a bus stop there and going South at the foot of the hilly bit the cycle path feeds into a narrow 2 way cycle only section around which point IIRC there is also a foot bridge for pedestrians to cross the N11.

blorg

I know that one myself, couldn't believe it first time I cycled on it. Of course it just means that cyclists use the footpath instead so is completely counter-productive. Personally I never use that side going downhill in any case and don't know that I've seen anyone else do so, it's not at all clear how to get on to it in the first place and what they expect you to do to get _back_ to the right side of the N11 to continue into town is just insane.