Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Pity bus users are not as motivated as cyclists

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Stephen15 wrote: »

    I fail to see what cyclist lobbies you complain about the lack of cycle lanes and then don't use the ones that have been provided.

    Because a dotted white line painted on the ground does not a cycle lane make.


  • Options
    #63
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Because a dotted white line painted on the ground does not a cycle lane make.

    If you read one of the OPs posts they were saying that dotted line cycle paths were less dangerous than at level footpaths. So what do cyclists really want?


  • Options
    #64
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,812 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    As I said if your so concerned about your safety dismount and use the pedestrian crossing
    is a cycle lane a cycle lane if it can't be cycled?


  • Options
    #65
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,812 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    If you read one of the OPs posts they were saying that dotted line cycle paths were less dangerous than at level footpaths. So what do cyclists really want?
    the OP never claimed to be a cyclist, and i'm not inclined to guess what non-cyclists want from infrastructure provided for cyclists.


  • Options
    #66
    P_1
    Registered Users Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    Stephen15 wrote: »

    I fail to see what cyclist lobbies you complain about the lack of adequate cycle lanes and then don't use the inadequate ones that have been provided.

    The lane south of Donnybrook is a classic example of such an inadequate lane.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    P_1 wrote: »
    The lane south of Donnybrook is a classic example of such an inadequate lane.

    So what do want then, a bloody underpass for cyclists


  • Options
    #68
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    If you read one of the OPs posts they were saying that dotted line cycle paths were less dangerous than at level footpaths. So what do cyclists really want?
    The OP said no such thing but since you asked we want dedicated infrastructure no more no less. And no you can't paint on dedicated infrastructure


  • Options
    #69
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    So what do want then, a bloody underpass for cyclists

    Nice strawman. No one suggested an underpass


  • Options
    #70
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,073 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Boulevardier wrote: »
    "Interestingly, in Amsterdam, when cycle lanes are closed to do maintenance (yes, they actually do regular, continuous maintenance of cycle lanes, imagine!), they actually close the bus lane next to the cycle lane and turn it into a temporary dedicated cycle lane. The idea of mixing cyclists and massive vehicles is pretty abhorrent to them."

    What happens to the buses in that situation? Do they lose priority over general traffic? If so, I would be very unhappy.

    Bus priority over cycling safety...
    end of the road wrote: »
    agreed, especially as it's likely bus users and even pedestrians, would be in greater numbers then cyclists.

    ...numbers over cycling safety...

    Is it any wonder that people involved with cycling are protesting?!?!


  • Options
    #71
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    The OP said no such thing but since you asked we want dedicated infrastructure no more no less. And no you can't paint on dedicated infrastructure

    So how can you negotiate junctions with dedicated cycling infrastructure. Pedestrians still have to cross using pedestrian crossings at junctions even though there is dedicated pedestrian infrastructure (footpaths). So how do you suggest cyclists manage.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Nice strawman. No one suggested an underpass

    So what do you suggest to segregate cyclists from other road users


  • Options
    #73
    brokenarms
    Registered Users Posts: 1,387 ✭✭✭brokenarms


    07Lapierre wrote: »
    Cutting across is illegal...you can only turn "when safe to do so". If there is a cyclist in your way, you need to wait until it's safe to turn.
    Just to be clear on what's illegal.
    A cyclist must yield

    If the vehicle is turning left and looks like it will turn left before the cyclist undertakes.

    Of course. if by doing so you will cause the cycle to break hard or crash the driver must yield.


  • Options
    #74
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    So what do you suggest to segregate cyclists from other road users

    The Dutch model


  • Options
    #75
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    So how can you negotiate junctions with dedicated cycling infrastructure. Pedestrians still have to cross using pedestrian crossings at junctions even though there is dedicated pedestrian infrastructure (footpaths). So how do you suggest cyclists manage.

    The Dutch model


  • Options
    #76
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,073 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    I fail to see what cyclist lobbies you complain about the lack of cycle lanes and then don't use the ones that have been provided.

    Can you tell the difference between:

    (1) cycling campaigners lobbying for high-quality infrastructure, and:

    (2) the low-quality cycling infrastructure currently in place

    ?


  • Options
    #77
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    brokenarms wrote: »
    Just to be clear on what's illegal.
    A cyclist must yield

    If the vehicle is turning left and looks like it will turn left before the cyclist undertakes.

    Of course. if by doing so you will cause the cycle to break hard or crash the driver must yield.

    Cyclist must yield? Citation needed.
    What may not be illegal but is certainly is dangerous is to overtake a cyclist only to turn left almost immediately


  • Options
    #78
    P_1
    Registered Users Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    brokenarms wrote: »
    Just to be clear on what's illegal.
    A cyclist must yield

    If the vehicle is turning left and looks like it will turn left before the cyclist undertakes.

    Of course. if by doing so you will cause the cycle to break hard or crash the driver must yield.

    Indeed, sadly quite a lot of drivers are prone to not using their indicators prior to the dreaded left hook mind.


  • Options
    #79
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,221 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    brokenarms wrote: »
    Just to be clear on what's illegal.
    A cyclist must yield

    If the vehicle is turning left and looks like it will turn left before the cyclist undertakes.

    Of course. if by doing so you will cause the cycle to break hard or crash the driver must yield.

    Correct! The driver would never speed up and cut in front of a cyclist....that would be dangerous ( for the cyclist)


  • Options
    #80
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,967 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    As I said if your so concerned about your safety dismount and use the pedestrian crossing...
    Why would I do that when there is a part of the road available to me that I'm perfectly entitled to use.
    Stephen15 wrote:
    ..I fail to see what cyclist lobbies you complain about the lack of cycle lanes and then don't use the ones that have been provided.
    Eh?....I've never lobbied for cycle tracks and I rarely use them as I prefer not to be relegated to a second class status.


  • Options
    #81
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    Wishbone Ash wrote: »
    Why would I do that when there is a part of the road available to me that I'm perfectly entitled to use.

    Its inconsiderate to bus drivers and passengers for a start and would be illegal if I was in charge. So why are you risking getting hit by a bus in order to get to your destination quicker, your basically favouring getting hit by a car in favour of getting hit by a bus. As cycling in the cycle lane your risking getting by car and cycling bus lane your risking getting hit by a bus.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 17,990 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    I regularly walk into work - it takes over an hour. If I cycled it, I could likely do it in 10-15 minutes. That'd be hours saved a week. The reason I don't is I'd be far too afraid of getting smeared under a truck or clipped by a car because even looking at some of the cyclists going by, and how close they are to traffic, can be freaky. Too much risk. Be great if there was something more viable for the likes of myself.


  • Options
    #83
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    Its inconsiderate to bus drivers and passengers for a start and would be illegal if I was in charge. So why are you risking getting hit by a bus in order to get to your destination quicker, your basically favouring getting hit by a car in favour of getting hit by a bus. As cycling in the cycle lane your risking getting by car and cycling bus lane your risking getting hit by a bus.

    Honestly what does this even mean. Who is in favour of getting hit by a car instead of a bus?


  • Options
    #84
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    ixoy wrote: »
    I regularly walk into work - it takes over an hour. If I cycled it, I could likely do it in 10-15 minutes. That'd be hours saved a week. The reason I don't is I'd be far too afraid of getting smeared under a truck or clipped by a car because even looking at some of the cyclists going by, and how close they are to traffic, can be freaky. Too much risk. Be great if there was something more viable for the likes of myself.

    Fair enough I see the point that we should have proper cycling infrastructure like in The Netherlands but really what I can't understand is why cyclists can't have to cycle on the road and hold up buses while risking their life. If they were segrated properly it would be great yes but they are not.

    I personally think cyclists are stupid they are risking they're lives on a daily basis. Why do they bother wait until we have Amsterdam like infrastructure before getting on your bike or just stick to quiter roads with less buses or cycle on the footpath.

    I do cycle from time to time but when I do I stick to quiet roads like housing estates and the better cycle like around Blackrock for example.


  • Options
    #85
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,967 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    Its inconsiderate to bus drivers and passengers for a start and would be illegal if I was in charge. So why are you risking getting hit by a bus in order to get to your destination quicker, your basically favouring getting hit by a car in favour of getting hit by a bus. As cycling in the cycle lane your risking getting by car and cycling bus lane your risking getting hit by a bus.
    OK a few points (but I don't even know why I'm feeding a troll).

    1. What makes you think I'm trying to get to my destination more quickly?
    2. There are no cycle lanes on my normal commute so I don't see it as anything different from what I'm accustomed to.
    3. Many of us were cycling long before there were any bus lanes and back then we weren't accused of doing anything inconsiderate.
    4. Saying something would be illegal if you were in charge is a very naive argument which anyone could use to suit their own agenda.
    5. I could argue that buses delay my journey, as do other vehicles which are entitled to use the bus lane.
    6. I don't feel 'at risk' from bus drivers - most of them don't engage in risky behaviour.


  • Options
    #86
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    Wishbone Ash wrote: »
    OK a few points (but I don't even know why I'm feeding a troll).

    1. What makes you think I'm trying to get to my destination more quickly?
    2. There are no cycle lanes on my normal commute so I don't see it as anything different from what I'm accustomed to.
    3. Many of us were cycling long before there were any bus lanes and back then we weren't accused of doing anything inconsiderate.
    4. Saying something would be illegal if you were in charge is a very naive argument which anyone could use to suit their own agenda.
    5. I could argue that buses delay my journey, as do other vehicles which are entitled to use the bus lane.
    6. I don't feel 'at risk' from bus drivers - most of them don't engage in risky behaviour.

    You're cycling in the bus lane instead of dismounting and crossing at the pedestrian lights.

    Well if there is no cycle lane then cycle as near as possible to the kerb without touching it allowing cars and other road users to overtake.

    Holding up other road users and not allowing them overtake you is what I would call inconsiderate.

    Buses may delay your journey but bus users are the majority and cyclists are in the miniority I don't why the majority should be delayed by a miniority.

    As for bus drivers not engaging in risky behaviour. No sane minded induvidual willing goes out to knock down cyclists they try to avoid but unfortunately people make mistakes and accidents happen.


  • Options
    #87
    brokenarms
    Registered Users Posts: 1,387 ✭✭✭brokenarms


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Cyclist must yield? Citation needed.
    What may not be illegal but is certainly is dangerous is to overtake a cyclist only to turn left almost immediately

    I am not going to argue with that. You are 100% right.



    Citation is here in Part 3

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2012/si/332/made/en/print

    (b) A pedal cyclist may overtake on the left where vehicles to the pedal cyclist’s right are stationary or are moving more slowly than the overtaking pedal cycle, except where the vehicle to be overtaken—

    (i) has signalled an intention to turn to the left and there is a reasonable expectation that the vehicle in which the driver has signalled an intention to turn to the left will execute a movement to the left before the cycle overtakes the vehicle,

    (ii) is stationary for the purposes of permitting a passenger or passengers to alight or board the vehicle, or

    (iii) is stationary for the purposes of loading or unloading.”,


  • Options
    #88
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,073 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    Its inconsiderate to bus drivers and passengers for a start and would be illegal if I was in charge. So why are you risking getting hit by a bus in order to get to your destination quicker, your basically favouring getting hit by a car in favour of getting hit by a bus. As cycling in the cycle lane your risking getting by car and cycling bus lane your risking getting hit by a bus.
    Stephen15 wrote: »
    I personally think cyclists are stupid....

    The warning for trolling is for this.

    Nobody is choosing to get hit by a car or a bus and to suggest otherwise is trolling and calling people you disagree with stupid is another bit of clear trolling.

    -- moderator

    Wishbone Ash wrote: »
    OK a few points (but I don't even know why I'm feeding a troll)

    Please don't refer to other posters as trolls -- report their posts if you want. We have this rule in C&T to avoid threads going off-topic and to leave dealing trolls to the mods.

    -- moderator


  • Options
    #89
    P_1
    Registered Users Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    You're cycling in the bus lane instead of dismounting and crossing at the pedestrian lights.

    Bikes are traffic, why would traffic mix with pedestrians?
    Well if there is no cycle lane then cycle as near as possible to the kerb without touching it allowing cars and other road users to overtake.

    Where to begin here? Are you aware of the risks that hugging the kerb causes? Best practice is to leave at least a foot (if not more) between your left and the kerb.
    Holding up other road users and not allowing them overtake you is what I would call inconsiderate.

    Average speed for urban traffic is what? 15km/h or something. Most cyclists would be averaging more than that.
    Buses may delay your journey but bus users are the majority and cyclists are in the miniority I don't why the majority should be delayed by a miniority.

    See the point above.
    As for bus drivers not engaging in risky behaviour. No sane minded induvidual willing goes out to knock down cyclists they try to avoid but unfortunately people make mistakes and accidents happen.

    True for the majority. Untrue for a dangerous minority.


  • Options
    #90
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,812 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    Its inconsiderate to bus drivers and passengers for a start and would be illegal if I was in charge.
    funny then that two recent ministers for transport have admitted, after seeking advice (including from the RSA), that forcing cyclists to use cycle lanes or cycle paths is a bad idea.
    if you were in charge of such decisions, you know your duty would be to serve *all* road users, not just your own needs?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    if you were in charge of such decisions, you know your duty would be to serve *all* road users, not just your own needs?

    Unfortunately a sense of duty is not always the main influencer on decisions by people in such positions.


Advertisement