Cork SRR - Cyclist in Middle Lane

dr.fuzzenstein · 15-12-2013 8:46pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

This is getting well OT, but since you raise the usual hares...

I'm a car owner and motorist. My (motor) taxed and insured car stays in the driveway ?99% of the time, and I commute by bike where it makes sense, eg the school run on Galway's car-clogged roads.

Am I a beggar or a chooser?

I don't see how you have another choice in Galway, that city definitely is not designed with cars in mind. Or cyclists. Or pedestrians. In fact it doesn't seem designed, more kind of sneezed out.

Red Belly · 15-12-2013 9:18pm

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

Yes and all non motorized vehicles are not currently required to pay taxes to use the roads.

Motorists don't pay motor tax to USE the road, just to drive their cars on it... and motor tax doesn't even scratch the surface of what the road network costs.

We all pay more than enough tax to have a road infrastructure suitable and safe for all.

Out of curiosity, if Motor Tax were all it took to put in place our road network, would anyone feel it appropriate for a cyclist who also pays motor tax because they own a car to pay extra because they're also a cyclist? Is anyone arguing that cycling costs the state as much as motoring in terms of pollution, road infrastructure, policing, road deaths, general health costs, obesity, productivity lost to congestion,etc.? Effective cycling infrastructure will cost a fraction of what roads generally cost, will deliver untold long term benefits to the health of the nation, and will make the roads less congested for everyone. It's a no-brainer really, as is the reason why it doesn't happen ... just consider the economic power of the cycling lobby to that of oil, construction and car industries.

rb

Red Belly · 15-12-2013 9:23pm

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

Hmm

Anyway as this is a motors forum, I have no interest in discussing cyclists with cyclists who obviously have no interest in listening to the discussion (about the same level of interest that they have in obeying the ROTR :P)

On a relatively short drive today for a bit of Xmas shopping, I observed 6 illegally parked cars, four drivers using their mobiles, two who turned without signalling and one driving the wrong way down a one way st. I did not observe any cyclists breaking rules of the road (and surprisingly enough given the weather today I did see a few cyclists).

rb

Tenzor07 · 16-12-2013 1:18am

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Except we don't have a car culture here, unless you count a heritage of letting bog-standard sh*te-boxes rust to fcuk in the rain as a car culture.
No, here you simply get punished for wanting to get around.
"Ah jaysus, you'll be drivin' around in your car, ah jaysus now, t'will cosht you big that road tax now and wait till ya fill up!"
Public transport, same attitude, but if you're on a bike, you just get punished by sh*t infrastructure.
In other countries there is an idea what should be encouraged and supported, the way it is here is just to punish people for driving, having a job, buying a house, opening a business, having any kind of savings, or getting on in any way shape or form.
The Irish Don't Do Encouragement! Only "You think you're getting on, just wait till I fix your wagon!"
Unless you are a dole scrounger with 17 kids, of course. Then you get everything shoved up yer arse by the state. And if you don't get down there and start yelling at people till you do!
Other than that, you have to be in the top 1%, the cream of society, rich and thick.

Great rant, and I thoroughly agree!

The basic point here is that we are all in a sh.i.t situation the way this country is run, but when people are more concerned about a couple of scratches on their 95 Micra or a few quid extra on the insurance over a blood covered female student left lying on the side of the road, or see anyone on a bicycle as a target then you really have to wonder if we have a society at all!?

Padraig Mor · 18-02-2014 1:55pm

At the risk of this thread degenerating again..........I think I saw this idiot. Last Thursday, approx 17.15 - rather brighter than the OP's experience, but dimming rapidly. Roughly the same location, heading West between the Sarsfield and Bandon Road flyovers. I was heading the other direction and, ironically enough, was just thinking of this thread as I went over the flyover (I don't go that way too often), imagining the lunacy of a cyclist on the other side of the road, when I caught a glimpse of hi vis* in between all the cars. As I continued, the last I saw in my rear view mirror was the nutter trying to cross a lane (two lanes even?) of traffic to continue over the flyover. Madness.

*of course, some cyclists would have us believe that hi vis is the work of the devil and should not be worn - well, it's what caught my eye on this occasion.

lway · 18-02-2014 3:51pm

Padraig Mor wrote: »

At the risk of this thread degenerating again..........I think I saw this idiot. Last Thursday, approx 17.15 - rather brighter than the OP's experience, but dimming rapidly. Roughly the same location, heading West between the Sarsfield and Bandon Road flyovers. I was heading the other direction and, ironically enough, was just thinking of this thread as I went over the flyover (I don't go that way too often), imagining the lunacy of a cyclist on the other side of the road, when I caught a glimpse of hi vis* in between all the cars. As I continued, the last I saw in my rear view mirror was the nutter trying to cross a lane (two lanes even?) of traffic to continue over the flyover. Madness.

*of course, some cyclists would have us believe that hi vis is the work of the devil and should not be worn - well, it's what caught my eye on this occasion.

Even worse now that the speed limit has gone up to 100kph in that stretch.

This morning I saw a cyclist on the road from Midleton, between Little Island and the turn off for the Dunkettle roundabout. In fairness he/she had a hi-vis top and a rear flashing light but in the heavy fog this morning it was seriously dangerous. There's no hard shoulder there just three lanes and most of it is 120kph limit. He/She was keeping to the left but as I was passing in the overtaking lane there was a truck in the driving lane and the car behind the truck pulled into the leftmost lane to take the exit for the tunnel and had to brake heavily when they realised there was a cyclist there. Three lanes of fast moving traffic in heavy fog and no hard shoulder, sometimes I wonder what people are thinking.

And besides that, where were they going, they would have had to cross one lane of traffic if they were going straight on or else take the exit and go down through the tunnel where there is no hard shoulder either.

cpoh1 · 18-02-2014 6:38pm

I have personally witnessed this cyclist on the south ring a few times. Speed differentials of 80kmph in wet poor visibility weather and no hard shoulder. Pure madness.

Another two darwin award nominees cycle the same route at around half 7 some mornings, two abreast in the left hand lane. Someone needs to explain to them that no amount of lighting or hi vis will protect you from the slap of a car at a much higher speed than a bike.

Iwannahurl · 18-02-2014 6:59pm

Padraig Mor wrote: »

of course, some cyclists would have us believe that hi vis is the work of the devil and should not be worn

.

cpoh1 wrote: »

Someone needs to explain ... that no amount of hi vis will protect you from the slap of a car at a much higher speed than a bike.

CramCycle · 18-02-2014 7:09pm

lway wrote: »

Even worse now that the speed limit has gone up to 100kph in that stretch.....
In fairness he/she had a hi-vis top and a rear flashing light but in the heavy fog this morning it was seriously dangerous. There's no hard shoulder there just three lanes and most of it is 120kph limit.

I understand what you are saying but it should be said that first, it is a limit not a target, if its not safe to do 100kmph then drivers shouldn't be. Second on the heavy fog morning, anyone doing even close to 120 should have their license pulled and be done for dangerous driving.

On my first point, if you are travelling so fast that you can't brake within your range of view (in this scenario when you see the cyclist or if a car had broken down and was blocking the lane) then you are going to fast. In fact, replace cyclist with stalled or broken down car in area with no hard shoulder and then re think the situation as to who is more at fault (not saying the cyclist is innocent of stupidity but there seems to be other issues).

rovoagho · 18-02-2014 10:13pm

TherapyBoy · 19-02-2014 1:14am

CramCycle wrote: »

I understand what you are saying but it should be said that first, it is a limit not a target, if its not safe to do 100kmph then drivers shouldn't be. Second on the heavy fog morning, anyone doing even close to 120 should have their license pulled and be done for dangerous driving.

On my first point, if you are travelling so fast that you can't brake within your range of view (in this scenario when you see the cyclist or if a car had broken down and was blocking the lane) then you are going to fast. In fact, replace cyclist with stalled or broken down car in area with no hard shoulder and then re think the situation as to who is more at fault (not saying the cyclist is innocent of stupidity but there seems to be other issues).

The only thing I'd say is that generally your car breaking down in such a situation isn't a choice you make, where you cycle is.

kub · 19-02-2014 1:17am

corktina wrote: »

I could never see why they would ban cyclists just because it's a tunnel. It's just an ordinary road with a roof and hundreds of miles of road have no shoulder.

With lung fulls of fine fumes as well.

hoodwinked · 19-02-2014 1:26am

CramCycle wrote: »

I understand what you are saying but it should be said that first, it is a limit not a target, if its not safe to do 100kmph then drivers shouldn't be. Second on the heavy fog morning, anyone doing even close to 120 should have their license pulled and be done for dangerous driving.
.

in fairness they should be looking at applying motorway rules to 100km/h + roads

if it is not safe for slow moving vehicles to be among vehicles moving that fast on motorway surely the same applies on the midleton - cork road, and SRR,

knowing that road network and knowing there are so many alternative routes, i would never cycle that road, or walk it for that matter be it legal or not.

rovoagho · 19-02-2014 1:42am

Since my other post was removed as "unhelpful", I'll say this: People as much expect a cyclist on that road as they would Muhammad Ali wrestling with a kitten. They shouldn't be on it, full stop; if they had a brain in their heads, they wouldn't be on it. But no, it's their right not just to put themselves in danger, but everyone else too.

I've had it to ^here^ with cyclists. Between the idiots that cycle two abreast in completely inappropriate places to the complete simpletons that cycle on footpaths, the wrong side of the road, through red lights and onto yellow boxes, really pretty much anywhere bar the cycle lanes they campaigned for and now refuse to use, all resplendent in outfits that would make golfers point and laugh, the entire lot of them can plain and simple eat my balls. I hope they choke on them.

Alanstrainor · 19-02-2014 10:43am

These threads always end in the same way. Sweeping generalisations, from one side to the other, with petty insults being thrown around to boot. Report this chap to the gardai if you see him.

Thread closed.

Cork SRR - Cyclist in Middle Lane

Comments