Cycling - too dangerous?

[Colin Blackburn]

Tony W wrote:
> "Colin Blackburn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Although I'm no fan of Clarkson (Jezza) I did like him pointing out on one of his progs that it is
>>cheaper (in petrol tokens) to send a bike from London to Edinburgh by courier than to carry it on
>>the roofrack due to increased wind resistance. Of course what didn't probably even enter his mind
>>was the idea of using the train to get his lazy **** up there
>
> too.
>
> Sadly, using the train would probably cost a vast number of coupons more than driving, would be
> crowded and late. Getting your bike on the train just adds to the cost and the nightmare.

I didn't suggest that it would be cheaper just that it would be something that wouldn't even dawn on
him. I use the trains all the time and regularly take bikes on them. Yes, trains are often late and
Virgin XC can be crowded but I must admit that on the whole it isn't quite a nightmare.

Colin

 

[David Nutter]

Tony W <[email protected]> said:

> Sadly, using the train would probably cost a vast number of coupons more than driving, would be
> crowded and late. Getting your bike on the train just adds to the cost and the nightmare.

It depends on your train journey. Just before Christmas I went to Preston with the bike. First of
all was Durham to York on a GNER intercity. With my cycle reservation that went fine, I just put it
in the guard's van and that was that. Marvellous.

Returning, the leg from Manchester to Durham on an Arriva train was hideous. The platform staff
didn't have a clue where a bike should get on; consequently I ended up stuck in the middle of the
train which was standing room only with nowhere to put the bike. Eventually I stashed it in the loo
and went to find the conductor who helped me reposition it by the payphone.

All was well until the trolley monkey decided it was a "fire hazard"[1], wouldn't believe that I'd
been told to put it there and couldn't suggest anywhere else to put it. Thankfully the conductor was
again helpful in telling him to shut up and go away; a minor bright spot.

The lesson in all this for me? Buy a Brompton which would certainly add to the expense of a journey!

Regards,

-david

[1] Several kilos of steel being *really* flammable of course

 

[Tony W]

"Colin Blackburn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I didn't suggest that it would be cheaper just that it would be something that wouldn't even dawn
> on him. I use the trains all the time and regularly take bikes on them. Yes, trains are often late
> and Virgin XC can be crowded but I must admit that on the whole it isn't quite a nightmare.

Cheaper is a good way of encouraging people to leave the car at home -- especially when you are
offering an inferior and inadequate service as an alternative (inferior to other rail systems, not
necessary inferior to car travel).

As you will gather train travel in this country is not, generally, something I consider as a
practical option, though, when outside the UK it is very often my preferred option. I have had a
German BahnCard (gives half price travel for a fairly modest up front charge) for about 8 of the
last 9 years because I have used their trains sufficiently to make it very economic. I have simply
had too many bad experiences with British railways to consider them except for travel into London
(where no-one with a brain would drive) and in extremis. Sadly, for large chunks of the day you
cannot take your bike on a train within miles of London.

Clarkson was on Question Time last night. His 'solution' to congestion in London was 'interesting'.
Retime the lights, eliminate bus lanes (busses being, after all, just a method of carting life's
inadequate about) and remove lots of yellow lines so people can park.

Well -- its a plan

Perhaps we should replace the bus lanes with the equivalent of the Soviet Zil lanes for Clarkson and
other important people.

T

 

[Tony W]

"David Nutter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

snip

> All was well until the trolley monkey decided it was a "fire hazard"[1], wouldn't believe that I'd
> been told to put it there and couldn't suggest anywhere else to put it. Thankfully the conductor
> was again helpful in telling him to shut up and go away; a minor bright spot.

In Morocco initially I didn't know the 'system' (which is you check the bike in as baggage 30 mins
before the train leaves & collect it from the baggage office 10 mins after arrival) so, on my first
journey, I put my (bagged) bike at the end of the corridor (there being no obvious way of getting it
anywhere else and the 'trolley monkey' telling me that it was OK.

No problem until the train filled up & became standing room only (even in 1st class where I was)..

At that point the guard comes along asking whose bag/bike it is.

'No problem Sir. It was causing an obstruction so we've moved it to the baggage van for you
(fortunately it was propped up by the door linking to the baggage van). Where are you travelling to?
OK -- That will be (about) 2 quid, here is your receipt, collect it at the Parcel Office. Have a
nice stay in Morocco's.

Now BR's nightmare children just don't offer anything like that level of service -- indeed they
don't even understand the basic concept.

T

 

[Colin Blackburn]

Tony W wrote:

> Clarkson was on Question Time last night. His 'solution' to congestion in London was
> 'interesting'. Retime the lights, eliminate bus lanes (busses being, after all, just a method of
> carting life's inadequate about) and remove lots of yellow lines so people can park.

Well, he's a Thatcher's boy. What did she say once, anyone using public transport after the age of
35 is a failure, something like that and I'm sure she would have mentioned bikes in there too if
she'd even seen one.

> Perhaps we should replace the bus lanes with the equivalent of the Soviet Zil lanes for Clarkson
> and other important people.

Well, the Oxford Traffic Scheme caused Clarkson to vow to never visit Oxford again, let's hope
congestion charging and parking restrictions can keep him out of other cities.

Colin

 

[Clive George]

"Tony W" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> Clarkson was on Question Time last night. His 'solution' to congestion in London was
> 'interesting'. Retime the lights, eliminate bus lanes (busses being, after all, just a method of
> carting life's inadequate about) and remove lots of yellow lines so people can park.
>
> Well -- its a plan

Removing the yellow lines so people can park is potentially very interesting. I've heard it
suggested elsewhere (uc-uk) that removing parking restrictions from london for a day would have
amusing effects on traffic.

cheers, clive

 

[Andymorris]

Clive George wrote:
>
> Removing the yellow lines so people can park is potentially very interesting. I've heard it
> suggested elsewhere (uc-uk) that removing parking restrictions from london for a day would have
> amusing effects on traffic.
>

Oh Yes, Yes, Yes Do it, do it, do it.

It would be such a laff to see all the little jezzas waking up the morning after the gridlock.

--
Andy Morris

AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK

Love this: Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

 

[Tony W]

"wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >And every one that does makes it more dangerous for the few who are
left[1].
> >Do your duty to the Brotherhood and get out there
>
> Hey! Don't forget his duty to the Sisterhood! Right On!
>
> I *much prefer* riding on road to off-road. Nasty, dirty off-road stuff.
Done
> that - won't do it again out of choice ;-) Riding on tarmac is *much
better*!

Yes -- but Brianchi's were never really suited to ruff stuff were they!!

T

 

[The Mark]

wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter wrote:
> I *much prefer* riding on road to off-road. Nasty, dirty
off-road
> stuff. Done that - won't do it again out of choice ;-) Riding
on
> tarmac is *much better*!
>

The muck you collect off road comes off much easier than the muck that is on the roads just now :-(
--
Mark

 

[James Annan]

[email protected] (Scribe2b) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> >Seems likely to me that off-road riding is as dangerous, if not more so, than riding on road.
> ///////////////// a tumble in the dirt is one thing. a trip under the wheels of a 2-ton machine is
> another.

If the `tumble in the dirt' results in heabutting a rock or tree at 20mph, then the difference may
be purely academic. Are you aware of any decent statistics on MTBing fatalities? I'm not, but I've
heard of many serious injuries (including at least one death).

More subtle points, such as the possibility that the road rider is more likely to be undertaking a
useful journey (to work?) that will need to be undertaken by some means if they do not cycle (and
whatever method is used, it won't be risk free), will probably be lost on you.

James

 

[Peter Clinch]

wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter wrote:

> I *much prefer* riding on road to off-road. Nasty, dirty off-road stuff.

Not like the delightfully clean film of salt, liquid mud and diesel on real roads in winter
then... ;-(

> Done that - won't do it again out of choice ;-)

I prefer the roads, but some off road's nice for a change as it's a whole different ballgame. Not
one that includes getting one's shopping done, mind.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Peter Clinch]

Scribe2b wrote:

> a tumble in the dirt is one thing. a trip under the wheels of a 2-ton machine is another.

Quite so, but the latter is a very infrequent occurrence, where on the MTB I feel like I'm not
really trying if I don't fall off at least once on a ride.

Which is safer depends entirely on how you're going to define "safety".

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[David E. Belche]

"Tony W" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> "wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > >And every one that does makes it more dangerous for the few who are
> left[1].
> > >Do your duty to the Brotherhood and get out there
> >
> > Hey! Don't forget his duty to the Sisterhood! Right On!
> >
> > I *much prefer* riding on road to off-road. Nasty, dirty off-road stuff.
> Done
> > that - won't do it again out of choice ;-) Riding on tarmac is *much
> better*!
>
>
> Yes -- but Brianchi's were never really suited to ruff stuff were they!!
>

On the contrary - take at look at this;

http://209.217.20.46/site/bikes/40_CrossConcept.html

....not to mention the fact that they make MTBs too!

As far as James's later post goes, I guess off-roading is more dangerous if one considers the more
extreme aspects of it as favoured by some MTBers. On the other hand, from a leisure point of view,
it's good to get away from the traffic and on to bridleways and the like now and again. Mind you, I
guess I'm biased, seeing as I race 'cross; usually a pretty safe activity, where falling off
generally entails little injury [1] but much embarrassment due to being caked in mud
[2].

David E. Belcher

Dept. of Chemistry, University of York

[3] Fell into some brambles when my front wheel locked during a race last autumn, and cut my ankle
slightly; about as bad as it's ever got (touch wood).
[4] Then again, you end up being caked in mud even if you don't fall off!!

 

[Peter Clinch]

Tony W wrote:
> Sorry, but 'proper' Brianchi's are super light road bikes -- everything else is just badge
> engineering.

Not really into serious road racing iron so ICBW, but wouldn't "Brianchi" indricate a somewhat
dyslexic bradge maker?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Tony W]

"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Tony W wrote:
> > Sorry, but 'proper' Brianchi's are super light road bikes -- everything
else
> > is just badge engineering.
>
> Not really into serious road racing iron so ICBW, but wouldn't "Brianchi" indricate a somewhat
> dyslexic bradge maker?

Possible -- but then I am dyslexic so I have an excuse!!

T

 

[Tony W]

"wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I want to be one of those who are immortal!

Easy -- you just have to get the audience to confirm loudly that they believe in (Slab) Fairies. It
works for Tinkerbelle twice nightly every panto season

T

 

[Terry J]

> I certainly didn't go into that gap to assert my right-of-way. Far from it: the lorry had stopped
> and instead of us both staring at each other I attempted to clear the jam.

I often meet a milk lorry or horse truck in a similar situation, and, as you did , stop and find a
way for us to pass, A couple of years ago I saw him coming so stopped and stepped up onto the verge
only to find it not so solid after all. I fell backwards into a 4ft trench, the vegetation(nettles)
closing over me. The driver was quite alarmed and stopped where he thought I might be, shouting ''
you alright ,mate?'' and I popped up my head and shouted ''no problem, ta'' as though it happens
every day. Lycra does not keep out nettles.I looked like I'd been boiled when I got home. TerryJ

 

[Chris Malcolm]

"W K" <[email protected]> writes:

>"Chris Malcolm" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

>> It is not (IMHO) possible to be safe on the road if one's primary purpose is using the roads as a
>> gymnasium for the purposes of improving fitness. That distracts one too much from the important
>> business of staying safe. As soon as you push yourself towards your physical limits of strength,
>> exhaustion, etc., your physical state actually stops you from being as alert and aware of your
>> surroundings as you need to be,

>Jeez? How hard do you train?

I don't. I simply cycle to work, shops, etc., which as it happens, keeps me a lot fitter than
if I didn't.

>As someone who "trains" to do long distances at holiday pace I try not to push myself over my
>lactate threshold. I find that I do though, on standard commutes- and I am not keeling over into
>unconsciousness.

I wasn't suggesting anything as serious as that. However, I have seen a number of near accidents
involving cyclists who were simply accelerating with their heads down and not looking very far
forward. And a friend of mine, not training at all, but simply a rather competitive individual,
has in the past five years twice cycled head on into a parked car, in the same patch of road,
simply because he had his head down trying to build up speed to match car speeds for a difficult
junction ahead.

>I don't know the ins and outs of training, but surely the really really hard stuff isn't done that
>often, and only really for TT sprints.

>"Improving fitness" is not all about pushing your maximum limits.

No, but if you simply happen to breathing rather hard, and having a spot of bother with sweat
running into your eyes, it might take you that extra half second to react to a car overtaking you
with the intention of swinging across your path into a left turn.

And if you're doing no more than keeping stats on the time of your normal commute, with a view to
logging your improving fitness, you may tend to try to preserve the hard won momentum of speed to
keep your times good, rather than cautiously applying the brakes just in case the fool in from does
something silly.

Just approaching possible hazards a few mph faster increases your risk.

It's a question of priorities and probabilities, not of cyclists pushing themselves so hard they
faint and fall off!

--
Chris Malcolm [email protected] +44 (0)131 650 3085 School of Artificial Intelligence, Division of
Informatics Edinburgh University, 5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/daidb/people/homes/cam/ ] DoD #205

 

[Just Zis Guy]

On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:06:25 +0000 (UTC), "W K" <[email protected]> wrote:

>> It is not (IMHO) possible to be safe on the road if one's primary purpose is using the roads as a
>> gymnasium for the purposes of improving fitness.

>As someone who "trains" to do long distances at holiday pace I try not to push myself over my
>lactate threshold. I find that I do though, on standard commutes- and I am not keeling over into
>unconsciousness.

I think you're both right. Road racing, and riding flat out for extended periods, requires (in my
view) that you concentrate much harder on the mechanics of riding the bike than you would on either
a fast commute or a long recreational ride. I reckon a real racer in real race mode would leave me
for dead on my commute, even though I've only been overtaken by one cyclist in two years.

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

 

[David E. Belche]

[email protected] (David E. Belcher) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> Mind you, I guess I'm biased, seeing as I race 'cross; usually a pretty safe activity, where
> falling off generally entails little injury but much embarrassment due to being caked in mud

Speak of the devil, guess what happened to me whilst out training yesterday? Managed to find the
only big rut in the bridle path whilst avoiding somebody's dog [1], and was none-too-gracefully
dumped on the wet grass. No injury of any description, though.

David E. Belcher

Dept. of Chemistry, University of York

[1] There always seems to be a dog-and-owner audience present for these incidents. Or at least when
they happen to me, anyway.