Etiquette in Howth road cycle lane

fixieboy

Running a cycle lane alongside a pathway is complete madness and I'd be surprised if there hasn't been a serious cyclist Vs pedestrian/dog injury yet....what doesn't help however is macho idiots deliberately flying by pedestrians who have strayed into the cyclepath in order to scare them back onto the other side...I saw one such incident this morning when some pup sped up coming up to an old couple and shouted at them as he was going by...cheers to that person for pissing all over the reputation of cyclists and causing those people an unnecessary fright.

Yes...Cyclelanes in Dublin are a total joke designed by non-cycling DCC pencil pushers - but don't assume that because there is a cycle lane in place that you have a god-given right to be obnoxious towards others...

Dublin cyclists need to accept the reality that they are not going to be able to cycle freely and without obstruction while they are anywhere near the city centre...if you want to do this why not head out to the countryside where you won't have to deal with pedestrians?

Caroline_ie

fixieboy wrote: »

Dublin cyclists need to accept the reality that they are not going to be able to cycle freely and without obstruction while they are anywhere near the city centre...

I think most of us do.
---
... I am not sure I see the point of your post tbh.

If you cycle on the road, which is where you belong ( yes it is ) you are bullied by some motorists, and when you cycle on a cycle path, you are faced with having to zig zag between mamies and their kids, dogs, which is dangerous for both you and the pedestrian... etc.

Just the other day I was cycling through the Phoenix park towards town on my fixie, and a young couple had let their barely walking baby standing on the cycle lane, while they were getting things out of their car. I slowed down and told them to be careful with the baby on the lane, only to be told off by the mother.

I am not an agressive cyclist at all, but I am not going to let people 'walk' all over my right to cycle in town and on a cycle lane if i want to. I am not saying we should scare the hell out of old folks having a walk, but at least inform them they are in the way, nicely

Lumen

Our urban street architecture is mostly very old, and there isn't space for everybody to have their own personal road.

If everyone (peds, cyclists, drivers) would try to be more considerate than average, standards will improve, or at least not deteriorate, and showing others respect increases the chances that you will receive the same.

DirkVoodoo

I knocked into a lady getting off the bus.

Sounds like its entirely my fault right?

The bus driver opened the doors as soon as the bus stopped, I was passing right alongside at this point and slowed down but didn't expect a woman to hop (yes, she literally jumped out in front of me) onto the cycle path. I jammed on the brakes, started to fall sideways and bumped her. She carried on walking.

Personally I blamed the bus driver, he would have seen me coming up on the bus stop/cycle path and yet didnt hold the doors for a few seconds (a lot bus drivers do seem to hold the doors).

I have had to stop at bus stops before, not slow down, actually stop while people just walk off the bus and don't bother to move into the cycle lane.

You can't blame cyclists entirely for the poor design of cycle lanes/paths, but a bit of common sense from all sides would help. If pedestrians can't distinguish between the road, the cycle lane (it has a bike painted on it and it is clearly delineated!) and the footpath then they need as much education as bad cyclists and drivers.

72hundred

fixieboy wrote: »

Dublin cyclists need to accept the reality that they are not going to be able to cycle freely and without obstruction while they are anywhere near the city centre...if you want to do this why not head out to the countryside where you won't have to deal with pedestrians?

Why? If there were proper cycle lanes in place it would only be red lights and slower cyclists that should cause obstruction.

Caroline_ie wrote: »

Just the other day I was cycling through the Phoenix park towards town on my fixie, and a young couple had let their barely walking baby standing on the cycle lane, while they were getting things out of their car. I slowed down and told them to be careful with the baby on the lane, only to be told off by the mother.

The Phoenix park cycle lanes are turning into a joke now with the good weather, literally dozens of people over them. I think I'll be on the main road from now on.

fixieboy

Caroline_ie wrote: »

I think most of us do.
---
... I am not sure I see the point of your post tbh.

If you cycle on the road, which is where you belong ( yes it is ) you are bullied by some motorists, and when you cycle on a cycle path, you are faced with having to zig zag between mamies and their kids, dogs, which is dangerous for both you and the pedestrian... etc.

Just the other day I was cycling through the Phoenix park towards town on my fixie, and a young couple had let their barely walking baby standing on the cycle lane, while they were getting things out of their car. I slowed down and told them to be careful with the baby on the lane, only to be told off by the mother.

I am not an agressive cyclist at all, but I am not going to let people 'walk' all over my right to cycle in town and on a cycle lane if i want to. I am not saying we should scare the hell out of old folks having a walk, but at least inform them they are in the way, nicely

A rant at needless cycling machismo i suppose...I used to try the same thing and take the time to point out to people that they are in a cycle lane but 99 times out of 100 you'll get a filthy and few curses to send you on your way....the Dublin driving psyche doesn't come with a cycling patch and no matter how many cyclists freak out at drivers this won't change...equally with pedestrians...Irish people aren't inculcated with any respect for cyclists from a young age like they would be in Holland.

Freaking out at motorists and pedestrians will not change this attitude and I think all cyclists need to deal with the persecution complex, accept that Dublin is an absolute deathtrap on the bike, and carry on cycling with that in mind.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

fixieboy wrote: »

Freaking out at motorists and pedestrians will not change this attitude and I think all cyclists need to deal with the persecution complex, accept that Dublin is an absolute deathtrap on the bike, and carry on cycling with that in mind.

However acting like second class citizens and sitting at the back of the bus will further erode the respect that motorist and peds have for cyclists.

Sitting back and saying nothing is weak and wont get anything done.


/edit and by the way, I've been to Holland and cyclists there will stop for nobody.

Húrin

fixieboy wrote: »

Freaking out at motorists and pedestrians will not change this attitude and I think all cyclists need to deal with the persecution complex, accept that Dublin is an absolute deathtrap on the bike, and carry on cycling with that in mind.

Dublin is not a death trap. Pedestrians and motorists in a cycle lane are generally an inconvenience, not a mortal danger.

72hundred

fixieboy wrote: »

A rant at needless cycling machismo i suppose...I used to try the same thing and take the time to point out to people that they are in a cycle lane but 99 times out of 100 you'll get a filthy and few curses to send you on your way....the Dublin driving psyche doesn't come with a cycling patch and no matter how many cyclists freak out at drivers this won't change...equally with pedestrians...Irish people aren't inculcated with any respect for cyclists from a young age like they would be in Holland.

Freaking out at motorists and pedestrians will not change this attitude and I think all cyclists need to deal with the persecution complex, accept that Dublin is an absolute deathtrap on the bike, and carry on cycling with that in mind.

I agree with Sean K.

Its not progressive for cycling in Dublin or anywhere to simply say there's problems and that's just how it is - be careful out there. It should be seen as a place to improve standards.

niceonetom

fixieboy wrote: »

... but don't assume that because there is a cycle lane in place that you have a god-given right to be obnoxious towards others...

How about you don't assume that when someone in the real world does something you don't like, that it's reasonable to go on a public forum and address them personally?

Or how about you extend your stoicism to the errant behaviour of pedestrians to cyclists as well?

fixieboy wrote: »

...if you want to do this why not head out to the countryside where you won't have to deal with pedestrians?

...if you want to be taken seriously why don't you stop throwing your weight around with rubbish like this?

fixieboy

72hundred wrote: »

I agree with Sean K.

Its not progressive for cycling in Dublin or anywhere to simply say there's problems and that's just how it is - be careful out there. It should be seen as a place to improve standards.

"Progression" and cycling in Ireland do not go together....cycling in Dublin is now at a stage where any goodwill that once existed towards it has been eroded through continuous breaking of the law by fellow cyclists who insist on cycling on the path, breaking lights and on the wrong side of the road etc etc....also, the Greens are unlikely be back in Govt for quite some time after this term in office thus cyclings most powerful advocates will be no more...I just think there's too much bravado out there on the bikes..too many cyclists act like they have the same right to the roads as car and bus drivers and while I might want that to be the case there is absolutely no acknowledgment of this right by other road users - and there never will be.

When has freaking out at another road user ever changed behaviour...I'd say a very very small percentage of the time....the rest of the time a confrontation merely crystalises latent hatred.

I also think that if every commuting cyclist approached their journey with an acceptance that they are completely invisible to other road users then we would see a reduction in the number of cyclists taking risks and expressing outrage at any car that doesn't see them....

T-Square

I'd love to attach a airhorn the size of a ship to a bike, and ride up and down the Phoenix park cycle path blasting all the fatties who think they have a God given right to wobble up and down the designated cycle path.

fixieboy

niceonetom wrote: »

How about you don't assume that when someone in the real world does something you don't like, that it's reasonable to go on a public forum and address them personally?

Or how about you extend your stoicism to the errant behaviour of pedestrians to cyclists as well?



...if you want to be taken seriously why don't you stop throwing your weight around with rubbish like this?

I'm addressing an attitude that is prevalent among many many cyclists in Dublin...an attitude that is part of the reason that cyclists are so hated by other road users. If this isn't relevant to a cycling forum then where else would you suggest I post on this one?

Caroline_ie

fixieboy wrote: »

I'm addressing an attitude that is prevalent among many many cyclists in Dublin...an attitude that is part of the reason that cyclists are so hated by other road users. If this isn't relevant to a cycling forum then where else would you suggest I post on this one?

I actually don't think it is prevalent at all among cyclists. I think most of us 'Cyclists' go about our cycling ways, without too much hassle. We are not here for a fight, nor we are here for getting bullied by others. If someone attacks me, I will fight back.

I could also get a Panzer ...

72hundred

fixieboy wrote: »

"Progression" and cycling in Ireland do not go together....cycling in Dublin is now at a stage where any goodwill that once existed towards it has been eroded....

I think your views on the future of cycling are very negative, and unjustifiably so. Cycling in Dublin and Cork, Limerick, Galway etc. will become more popular in future for a variety of reasons; greens in gov (car tax/ cycle schemes), cost of petrol, traffic etc...

T-Square wrote: »

I'd love to attach a airhorn the size of a ship to a bike, and ride up and down the Phoenix park cycle path blasting all the fatties who think they have a God given right to wobble up and down the designated cycle path.

Too be fair at least they've actually got a bike. A lot of people use it for walking in the middle of the summer because the 10 yards of grass to the footpath is too much to ask... they deserve the air horn.

niceonetom

fixieboy wrote: »

I'm addressing an attitude that is prevalent among many many cyclists in Dublin...an attitude that is part of the reason that cyclists are so hated by other road users. If this isn't relevant to a cycling forum then where else would you suggest I post on this one?

It's not the relevance of your post that I'm taking issue with, fixieboy. It's the fact that it largely consists of a series or orders and complaints, addressed to "you" (ie. us, the members of this forum, who incidentally are unlikely to be the people you are actually pissed off with), and ironically enough, assumptions about our assumptions:

fixieboy wrote: »

don't assume that because there is a cycle lane in place that you have a god-given right to be obnoxious towards others...

see? You get more love if you complain about "them", not "you". It might seem like semantics, but tone is important, and I didn't like yours.

But wait, there's more. Do you see any irony in the fact that you are angry at people who are angry because they fail to show the same calm you do? Is it not a bit rich to rant about people ranting?

You may engaged is some sort of PR conscious raising campaign to foster bonhomie between pedestrians and cyclists, and you may feel that your good work is being undone by "macho idiots". I, on the other hand, am trying to get places. You can be the carrot, I'll continue to be the stick. The pedestrians can dislike me all they want. On the footpath. Fear too is a motivator.

T-Square

72hundred wrote: »

Too be fair at least they've actually got a bike. A lot of people use it for walking in the middle of the summer because the 10 yards of grass to the footpath is too much to ask... they deserve the air horn.

I should have been clearer, I was referring to fat bints who think nothing of walking with their fat butts wobbling up and down the cycle path.

The fact that cycle paths like that are full of people,
doesn't tell me good-will etc has gone,
it tells me pedesterians in a cycle path just don't give a rats about anyone but their (fat) selves.

I used to live in California, and would reguarly roller-blade or cycle up and down the fantastic cycle path that runs close to the sea, Venice beach, Malibu etc

I made the mistake of walking on it when I first arrived there, and got rightly blasted out of the way for being illiterate when it came to reading the signs and the prints of bikes on the path itself. And not being ignorant of cyclists desire to travel at speed without running peds over.

American cyclists/rollerblades wont' tolerate walkers on the bike path,
how come IRish cyclists get criticised for defending their "patch"?

scottreynolds

Ahh.. if its any consolation I use the Bike path most days and find it fine. Sure people walk all over the place but I'm happy to share as its a lot better than the roads - I have to avoid them but I'm not going to crash into them and yell just to prove a point. As a user of a path we have a responsibility to be sensible and avoid others as well.

Using that path in winter in far worse cause you can't see people. I hate it when I almost run into other cyclists but they have no lights.

ChipPanBuddha

fixieboy wrote: »

too many cyclists act like they have the same right to the roads as car and bus drivers and while I might want that to be the case there is absolutely no acknowledgment of this right by other road users - and there never will be.

There certainly never will be if cyclists don't act like they have the same rights to the roads as other road users.
Cycling in an assertive manner can help reinforce to other road users that you have just as much right to be there imo. It's also far safer than either acting all sheepish or the flip side, riding aggresivley.

Lumen

T-Square wrote: »

I should have been clearer, I was referring to fat bints who think nothing of walking with their fat butts wobbling up and down the cycle path.

The fact that cycle paths like that are full of people,
doesn't tell me good-will etc has gone,
it tells me pedesterians in a cycle path just don't give a rats about anyone but their (fat) selves.

I used to live in California, and would reguarly roller-blade or cycle up and down the fantastic cycle path that runs close to the sea, Venice beach, Malibu etc

I made the mistake of walking on it when I first arrived there, and got rightly blasted out of the way for being illiterate when it came to reading the signs and the prints of bikes on the path itself. And not being ignorant of cyclists desire to travel at speed without running peds over.

American cyclists/rollerblades wont' tolerate walkers on the bike path,
how come IRish cyclists get criticised for defending their "patch"?

It's great to see that you are spreading your particularly splendid brand of body-fascism wherever you go.

I completely agree with you. Personally, I think fat people should be executed, and rendered down for burning in power stations. Then I could charge my calorie-counting Garmin with their ugly-juice.

Until we have passed the required legislation, I'll be getting some "You don't have to be a lazy fattie to walk there, but it helps" t-shirts printed, and wafting around Dublin on a cloud of moral superiority.

My BMI is 20.3 today. Does that get me in your club?

Esroh

Lumen wrote: »

It's great to see that you are spreading your particularly splendid brand of body-fascism wherever you go.

I completely agree with you. Personally, I think fat people should be executed, and rendered down for burning in power stations. Then I could charge my calorie-counting Garmin with their ugly-juice.

Would the body fat not make great soap.And then just burn the rest:D

72hundred

Lumen wrote: »

It's great to see ... in your club?

I think he was getting more at the sudden influx of power walkers onto the cycle lane in the Phoenix park with the good weather.

Chips Lovell

Sunday morning heroes who go charging up and down the cycle paths of the the Phoenix Park and the Coast Road deserve to get a labrador caught in their spokes, especially those who are dodging children and old people on time trial bikes. If you want to ride fast, you go on the road.

fixieboy wrote: »

...accept that Dublin is an absolute deathtrap on the bike...

I've been cycling for years and I haven't been killed once.

fixieboy wrote: »

too many cyclists act like they have the same right to the roads as car and bus drivers

They have.

T-Square wrote: »

I'd love to attach a airhorn the size of a ship to a bike, and ride up and down the Phoenix park cycle path blasting all the fatties who think they have a God given right to wobble up and down the designated cycle path.

I don't know, when I got out on the bike, I'm looking to cycle not re-educate members of the public. BTW, there's nothing in the Phoenix Park by-laws about pedestrians being forbidden from walking on the cycle path.

tunney

fixieboy wrote: »

I also think that if every commuting cyclist approached their journey with an acceptance that they are completely invisible to other road users then we would see a reduction in the number of cyclists taking risks and expressing outrage at any car that doesn't see them....

I do approach my commute as if I am completely invisible to other road users - well invisible unless I force them to see me, which I do my cycling in the middle of the lane ensuring that all and sundry see me. *Touches wood* its worked with regards to my safety so far.

Now if motorists extended cyclists some courtesy I would feel safe cycling in towards the kerb and motorists would not have to have their commutes made longer by me obstructing the road and forcing them to "see" me.

Ryaner

Lumen wrote: »

My BMI is 20.3 today. Does that get me in your club?

BMI is a useless measure of crap. Sooner it is completely scrapped by the medical profession, the better.

CheGuedara

Ryaner wrote: »

BMI is a useless measure of crap. Sooner it is completely scrapped by the medical profession, the better.

True, while it works for the general population it bears no weight when applied to atheletes.

It would suggest that endurance athletes like triathletes, xc runners & cyclists etc are by and large unhealthy (significantly underweight) and that power atheletes like sprinters, weightlifters, rugby players etc are unhealthy (obese).

But for the purpose of getting Joe soap to lay off the pies n beer before he has a massive heart attack or stroke this fluffy science will do

Stark

fixieboy wrote:

too many cyclists act like they have the same right to the roads as car and bus drivers

Go away troll.

Stark

CheGuedara wrote: »

True, while it works for the general population it bears no weight when applied to atheletes.

It would suggest that endurance athletes like triathletes, xc runners & cyclists etc are by and large unhealthy (significantly underweight) and that power atheletes like sprinters, weightlifters, rugby players etc are unhealthy (obese).

I'm more towards the endurance end of the spectrum and I'm overweight according to my BMI. I'd have a lot more lean body mass and less fat than a typical person with my BMI though.

el_tonto wrote:

Sunday morning heroes who go charging up and down the cycle paths of the the Phoenix Park and the Coast Road deserve to get a labrador caught in their spokes, especially those who are dodging children and old people on time trial bikes. If you want to ride fast, you go on the road.

Problem I find there is that you get some psycho bus drivers who will try and run you into the kerb when you use the road instead of the cycle path. I find the Coast road cycle paths to be grand most of the time (except when you get a bike stolen after locking it up for 20 mins in full view of everyone).

TimAllen

tunney wrote: »

I do approach my commute as if I am completely invisible to other road users - well invisible unless I force them to see me, which I do my cycling in the middle of the lane ensuring that all and sundry see me. *Touches wood* its worked with regards to my safety so far.

Now if motorists extended cyclists some courtesy I would feel safe cycling in towards the kerb and motorists would not have to have their commutes made longer by me obstructing the road and forcing them to "see" me.

Exactly the kind of selfish ignorant behaviour that makes motorists view cyclists in a certain light.
Well done Tunney, doing your bit for cyclist diplomacy.
Obviously, when gleefully reporting ignorant road use and wanton disregard for other road users, you will, no doubt, only change your behaviour when you meet a motorist who takes extreme offense with your actions.
Now, I'm no expert, but reading this forum, the country is full of maniac motorists only waiting to pounce on an innocent cyclist such as yourself. Imagine if such a maniac decided you deserved a clap on the back for your efforts, resulting in a little "spill". Of course I would condemn such actions and, would of course send chocolates/grapes for your extended stay in hospital!

CheGuedara

Stark wrote: »

I'm more towards the endurance end of the spectrum and I'm overweight according to my BMI. I'd have a lot more lean body mass and less fat than a typical person with my BMI though.

And that's the exact problem with the BMI system, it doesn't differentiate between weight contributed by muscle mass or fat mass and fails to take into account that people can for the purposes of endurance sports have very low body fat masses and comparatively low lean muscle masses but be in reality very healthy.

But like I said before - it really is often for the purposes of getting those individuals who're toeing the line of atherosclerosis, stroke and heart attack to act to change. You can bring people in and give them blood lipid stats and cholesterol levels and get blank stares but if you use the simple BMI which they can do themselves and understand it's often a better approach.

CheGuedara

TimAllen wrote: »

Exactly the kind of selfish ignorant behaviour that makes motorists view cyclists in a certain light.
Well done Tunney, doing your bit for cyclist diplomacy.
Obviously, when gleefully reporting ignorant road use and wanton disregard for other road users, you will, no doubt, only change your behaviour when you meet a motorist who takes extreme offense with your actions.
Now, I'm no expert, but reading this forum, the country is full of maniac motorists only waiting to pounce on an innocent cyclist such as yourself. Imagine if such a maniac decided you deserved a clap on the back for your efforts, resulting in a little "spill". Of course I would condemn such actions and, would of course send chocolates/grapes for your extended stay in hospital!

Listen up buddy - cyclists are entitled to the road and to 'take the lane' in order to make themselves visible to other road users. It is part of a type of safety precaution behaviours called assertive cycling - (Please feel free to peruse the cycling wiki if you want to actually learn something before opening mouth and inserting foot with what can only be described as laser accuracy)

Now build a bridge.

Troll.

Ryaner

CheGuedara wrote: »

And that's the exact problem with the BMI system, it doesn't differentiate between weight contributed by muscle mass or fat mass and fails to take into account that people can for the purposes of endurance sports have very low body fat masses and comparatively low lean muscle masses but be in reality very healthy.

But like I said before - it really is often for the purposes of getting those individuals who're toeing the line of atherosclerosis, stroke and heart attack to act to change. You can bring people in and give them blood lipid stats and cholesterol levels and get blank stares but if you use the simple BMI which they can do themselves and understand it's often a better approach.

With the availability of fat measuring scales, it isn't too hard to get a better estimate than the BMI. Last figure I saw was that 30%+ of people where getting BMI results that were wrong enough to be considered dangerous for use when quoting for health insurance.

Basic example of myself getting down to a "safe" BMI for a company that quotes on BMI. Standard level is <25 before being considered overweight. That would put me sub 10% body fat. Without getting too technical, most doctors using the scale don't know the differences between a Mesomorph body type or an Ectomorph type which are near opposite ends of the BMI scale usually but both can be super fit.

Chips Lovell

Fake outrage and trollery is fuppin boring.

CheGuedara

el tonto wrote: »

Fake outrage and trollery is fuppin boring.

Is that for me?

CheGuedara

Ryaner wrote: »

Basic example of myself getting down to a "safe" BMI for a company that quotes on BMI. Standard level is <25 before being considered overweight. That would put me sub 10% body fat. Without getting too technical, most doctors using the scale don't know the differences between a Mesomorph body type or an Ectomorph type which are near opposite ends of the BMI scale usually but both can be super fit.

I think we're arguing the same point here, i think?

Chips Lovell

CheGuedara wrote: »

Is that for me?

Nope

CheGuedara

el tonto wrote: »

Nope

Phew,

(and I used my once weekly smiting of the stupid up on a Monday, damn...)

Bunnyhopper

fixieboy wrote: »

Running a cycle lane alongside a pathway is complete madness and I'd be surprised if there hasn't been a serious cyclist Vs pedestrian/dog injury yet....
[…]
Yes...Cyclelanes in Dublin are a total joke designed by non-cycling DCC pencil pushers
[…]
Dublin cyclists need to accept the reality that they are not going to be able to cycle freely and without obstruction while they are anywhere near the city centre...if you want to do this why not head out to the countryside where you won't have to deal with pedestrians?

So, the design at Howth is madness and an accident waiting to happen, Dublin cyclelanes are a total joke, and therefore cyclists who object to that state of affairs should not cycle in urban areas but should get out of Dublin and stick to the countryside?? And if they do decide to cycle in Dublin they should simply accept the madness, the total joke, the accident waiting to happen, the obstructions, etc.??

I agree that being obnoxious doesn't help anyone, but you don't seem to have thought this through.

fixieboy wrote: »

I used to try the same thing and take the time to point out to people that they are in a cycle lane but 99 times out of 100 you'll get a filthy and few curses to send you on your way....the Dublin driving psyche doesn't come with a cycling patch and no matter how many cyclists freak out at drivers this won't change...equally with pedestrians...
[…]
Freaking out at motorists and pedestrians will not change this attitude and I think all cyclists need to deal with the persecution complex, accept that Dublin is an absolute deathtrap on the bike, and carry on cycling with that in mind.

So, if someone is obnoxious to you you should just stop pointing out that they're in the wrong? Why shouldn't we stick up for our rights?

If it's as bad as you say; if people are as aggressive and rude to you as you say they are, when you just politely point out that they're in the wrong; if drivers are as reckless towards cyclists as you say they are; and if the situation is so dangerous that we either accept a deathtrap or don't cycle in Dublin then that doesn't seem to me to be a "persecution complex". It seems to me to be a well-founded disgust with an unacceptable situation.

You, however, give the impression that you recognize that it's unacceptable, but you're going to accept it anyway. First you recommend that we shouldn't be obnoxious, but then you cave in when people are obnoxious to you. I agree with the first part of that, but the second seems pretty feeble.

fixieboy wrote: »

...too many cyclists act like they have the same right to the roads as car and bus drivers and while I might want that to be the case there is absolutely no acknowledgment of this right by other road users - and there never will be.

Cyclists do have the same right to the roads.

Plus, if a filthy look and a few curses are enough to send us away with our tails between your legs then of course no-one will ever acknowledge cyclists' rights. Continue to stick up for yourself and you might get a bit more respect, particularly if you do it firmly and politely.

The sum total of your position seems to be that complaining (even politely) about a situation that you yourself acknowledge is dangerous will only get you dirty looks and potty mouths so we should all just put up with it.

Pathetic...

I agree that being obnoxious is unhelpful, but I think that more generally I'll take your advice when it's more coherent and less cravenly defeatist.

el tonto wrote: »

I've been cycling for years and I haven't been killed once.

alfalad

If runners/walkers etc were to walk in the middle of the road it wouldn't be too long before they were blown out of it or worse, the dividing line between the road and footpath is a couple of inches drop from the kerb and on O'Connell street not even that, so if runners and walkers are about to tell the difference there, it shouldn't be so hard when there is a nice white line with a picture of a bike. I don't agree with being overly rude but when this happens I have no issue in shouting/roaring "excuse me" as i come up to those people and saying "please use the footpath" as i go by, it generally works as i've turned round a couple of times and seen them move! Plus i don't think it's rude it's actually for there safety!

niceonetom

el tonto wrote: »

fixieboy wrote: »

..too many cyclists act like they have the same right to the roads as car and bus drivers....

They have.

Well, they have, right up to the point that a cycle lane is provided. Then, thanks to the mandatory usage stipulation in our legislation we have no right to use the road (though I do).

It's the no-win ness of the situation I find galling - if you (illegally) use the road it's a matter of time before some TimAllen type is up on your shoulder sitting on the horn and pointing at the cyclelane like a complete prick, and if you use the cyclelane it's a matter of time before (through sheer frustration) I find myself doing the same to pedestrians, ie. telling to get the f out of the way and use the path, it's right there ffs.

These shouldn't really be my options. But they are.

Ryaner

CheGuedara wrote: »

I think we're arguing the same point here, i think?

Quite possibly. I get a little worked up when BMI is mentioned as a real measure of anything

CheGuedara

Ryaner wrote: »

Quite possibly. I get a little worked up when BMI is mentioned as a real measure of anything

I'll agree to agree to that! It's fuzzy science at best

(but a lot of science is, I'm a molecular biologist, I've seen a lot!)

TimAllen

CheGuedara wrote: »

Listen up buddy - cyclists are entitled to the road and to 'take the lane' in order to make themselves visible to other road users. It is part of a type of safety precaution behaviours called assertive cycling - (Please feel free to peruse the cycling wiki if you want to actually learn something before opening mouth and inserting foot with what can only be described as laser accuracy)

Now build a bridge.

Troll.

Firstly, I am not your buddy - I dont even know you so please refrain from chav speak, ta!
Your so called assertive cycling is contrary to the rules of the road which requires slow moving road users to pull in so as not to inhibit the general progress of traffic. (You dont get to decide what progress should be).
A tractor driver was prosecuted recently for unreasonably holding up traffic - a cyclist to engage in the behaviour you suggest is not only breaking the law, he or she is making a complete prick out of themselves.
There are pricks in cars as well though, and what happens when a prick on two wheels meets a prick on four? Ouch!:eek:

Hermy

TimAllen wrote: »

...please refrain from chav speak...ta!...a complete prick...pricks in cars...a prick...a prick...

:rolleyes:

CheGuedara

TimAllen wrote: »

Firstly, I am not your buddy - I dont even know you so please refrain from chav speak, ta!
Your so called assertive cycling is contrary to the rules of the road which requires slow moving road users to pull in so as not to inhibit the general progress of traffic. (You dont get to decide what progress should be).
A tractor driver was prosecuted recently for unreasonably holding up traffic - a cyclist to engage in the behaviour you suggest is not only breaking the law, he or she is making a complete prick out of themselves.
There are pricks in cars as well though, and what happens when a prick on two wheels meets a prick on four? Ouch!:eek:

Progress would be you getting a clue. Safety is a cyclist taking the lane when necessary for the purposes of increased visibility.

Once again - build a bridge.

I suspect you won't get over it, so how about you go live under it. Troll.

72hundred

Can this thread to be consigned to the troll bashing back pages?

Bunnyhopper

TimAllen wrote: »

Your so called assertive cycling is contrary to the rules of the road which requires slow moving road users to pull in so as not to inhibit the general progress of traffic. (You dont get to decide what progress should be).

Do have a reference for that bit in the Rules of the Road? (I can't find it. Ta.)

"Assertive cycling" puts me in mind of Franklin's advice in Cyclecraft. He defines the primary position as being "in the centre of the leftmost moving traffic lane for the direction in which you wish to travel", and the secondary position as "about 1 metre (3 feet) to the left of the moving traffic lane if the road is wide, but not closer than 0.5 metres (1.5 feet) to the edge of any road".

He also says:

The primary riding position should be your normal riding position when you can keep up with traffic, when you need to emphasise your presence to traffic ahead, or when you need to prevent following drivers from passing you unsafely. […] Because the primary riding position can result in some inconvenience to following drivers, it is reasonable to ride further to the left when this could help others, so long as your own safety is not thereby impaired. At these times you should adopt the secondary riding position. […] Riding closer to the edge would leave you with no room for manoeuvre in the event of an emergency, while increasing the need to make unpredictable movements which could lead to a crash. […] Riding too close to the edge will also make you difficult to see by drivers coming out of side roads and drives. […] there are many occasions, even on busy roads, when you should use the primary position in order to benefit from the increased margin of safety that it provides.

He does advise that if the need to take up a primary position persists then you should pull in or slow down to allow safe overtaking when an appropriate opportunity arises.

You'll know from your own cycling experience that motorists don't always ensure cyclists have enough room. I think there is an extent to which the cyclist does get to "decide what progress should be". What I mean is: if I make a judgement that for the sake of my own safety I should adopt the primary position then, even if that does momentarily inconvenience a following motorist, I'm entitled to do it. I could say something similar of any other road user. The prosecution was for - as you said yourself - "unreasonably holding up traffic" (my emphasis). There are times when it is reasonable and even sensible to do something that happens to hold up traffic. That can include a cyclist taking up a central position in the lane.

That's what I understand assertive cycling to refer to (and I suspect that it's what CheGuedara had in mind). Whether Tunney is justified in taking up a central position in the lane depends upon the prevailing traffic conditions, but I have to presume that he does it considerately and with a concern for his own his safety paramount, and I'm quite convinced that there are circumstances in which it is the right thing to do.

(Also, I do think Hermy's point about "chav speak" is a good one.)

Raam

Allow me to attempt to get it back on topic, although I doubt it will last...

I commute on the track in question twice daily. For that purpose, I think it's one of the better tracks around, otherwise I wouldn't use it. Two long stretches without cars, junctions or lights...brilliant. On nice sunny weekends it gets very busy, but I tend not to use it on those days. It's not meant as just a through-way for cyclists to speed through on busy days or evenings, nor is it meant as a free for all for joggers and walkers to steam straight down the cycle section or for roller-bladers to weave in and out. It's for everyone to use and behave appropriately on. From the kid learning to cycle with his dad, to the couple out for a stroll or a leisurely cycle to the weekend warrior on his way to Howth for a hill session.

As a note, I've seen some very stupid behaviour from all types of users on the track...

I've seen a guy cycle straight into one of the poles that are placed in the middle of the track at a brief break in it for a layby. He was looking everywhere except the direction he was heading.

I've seen a guy on a bike get taken out by a dog on one of those extendable dog leads. He should have anticipated it as much as the the dog owner shouldn't let her dog wander into the track.

I've seen people walking along the path on the other side of the wall suddenly leap over straight in front of a cyclist causing a near miss.

I've seen, or more accurately, barely seen people running straight towards me dressed all in black in the dead of winter.

A lot of people waiting for buses seem to like standing in the middle of the cycle track for some reason.

I've also seen a guy on a moped cruising down it one fine summers eve

Even with all that, I'm still going to use it and I think it's a great facility for all to use.

monument

A bell.

They work.

Really. A surprising amount of the time. And you're supposed to have one anyway.

el tonto wrote: »

...accept that Dublin is an absolute deathtrap on the bike...

I've been cycling for years and I haven't been killed once.

Best comment at least in the last week.

Raam wrote: »

I think it's one of the better tracks around, otherwise I wouldn't use it. Two long stretches without cars, junctions or lights...brilliant.

Agreed, that's what I was thinking using the full stretch for the first time the other evening.

Raam wrote: »

On nice sunny weekends it gets very busy, but I tend not to use it on those days. It's not meant as just a through-way for cyclists to speed through on busy days or evenings, nor is it meant as a free for all for joggers and walkers to steam straight down the cycle section or for roller-bladers to weave in and out.

It wasn't too busy when I was using it, but I was thinking what's it like when it's busier. Which got me thinking it should be wider, and could be wider on the current section and such can be built into the proposed new sections.

If memory servers me correct, the cycle track along the beaches in LA is wide than it. Ah, it is in fact, far, far wider at least in the main section, which shows what our planners are really like when it comes to these things...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cianginty/481208463/in/set-72157600135728641/

TimAllen

CheGuedara wrote: »

Progress would be you getting a clue. Safety is a cyclist taking the lane when necessary for the purposes of increased visibility.

Once again - build a bridge.

I suspect you won't get over it, so how about you go live under it. Troll.

There is no excuse for holding up traffic, not alone is it illegal and failing to live up to your responsibility as a slow moving roaduser, it is anti social and basically advertises to all that you dont give a stuff about other roadusers. You can talk all you like about motorists changing their behaviour before you change yours - the usual line of drivel posted here (though I must concede, I cant remember if you are one of them) but it ignores the basic fact that individual roadusers have to take responsibility for their own actions and all roadusers should obey the law regardless of the actions of others.
If you are worried about visibility, invest in lights, hi-vis vests etc, dont be an ass. The real worry for anyone engaging in this behaviour is the likelihood of meeting an equally anti social ass on four wheels. I wouldnt play russian roulette if I were you. I saw a cyclist getting a right fright when the passenger of a white van threw liquid (soft drink I think) on him while passing him. I was in a traffic buildup behind them, caused by said cyclist "taking the lane" on a single carriageway with unbroken white line. Yes, of course I condemn the action and the perpetrator is a complete ass but at the same time, I wonder, would it have happened if the cyclist kept in and allowed traffic to progress? Or was it a death wish cyclist?

Billy Whizz

When I cycle, I get annoyed at bad drivers.
When I drive, I get annoyed at bad cyclists.

That's all there is to it really.