Idiots on the A1



T

Tony Raven

Guest
I've lost my Dhobi Wallah!..... wrote:
>
> I crawled along behind two cyclists on a narrow Devon lane recently. They
> were the epitome of 'smug' - dressed in bloody silly lycra costumes with
> daft pointed pixie helmets and wrap-around sunglasses as they slowly rode
> two abreast up a hill, preventing anything from passing them.
>
> The emanations of self-righteous 'greenness' coming from these two gaily
> coloured carnival performers was almost overpowering! - and if someone
> finally lost their temper and drove over them and their bloody bicycles it
> would be hard to condemn them for their actions.
>


You sound just like the caravanner's best friend, Jeremy Clarkson.

Tony
 
D

David Hansen

Guest
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:59:36 -0000 someone who may be Geoff Lane
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>if
>> someone finally lost their temper and drove over them and their bloody
>> bicycles it would be hard to condemn them for their actions.


It is always interesting when the mask slips and the "poor
downtrodden motorist" is revealed in their true form.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
T

Tony Raven

Guest
Artleknock wrote:
>
> Your point is?


Probably that quite a few people on the A1 that day were saying "The
idiots were towing caravans on a major trunk road on the same day that
all the holiday makers were heading home from up north." Its very easy
to select any one group - cyclists, caravanners etc and make them
scapegoats for journey delays.

In this case I have no problem with people cycling on the A1. I do have
concerns about the penchant for time trials to be run on busy A roads -
when people are racing against the clock they are not able to fully
concentrate on the traffic around them. There have been some serious
accidents and fatalities of time triallers around slip roads that a few
more seconds and attention to surrounding traffic might have avoided
(even though the fault was with the joining or leaving traffic)

Tony
 
C

cupra

Guest
Paul Boyd wrote:
> [email protected] said the following on 15/08/2007 19:14:
>
>> Certainly not on the M5 through Devon and Cornwall,

>
> The M5 barely touches Devon, and doesn't go anywhere near Cornwall :)
>
>> on it at weekends in June/September than July/August any day. Got
>> badly held up on it travelling to Bristol Airport last year, a one
>> hour journey took 2.5 hours - no accidents, just volume of traffic.
>> Can't remember if it was a Saturday or a Sunday. Also got held up on
>> south of Bristol a few weeks ago on a Sunday afternoon, again just
>> volume of traffic.

>
> I used to commute from just east of Bristol to Weston-super-Mare, and
> I can assure anyone that traffic on the M5 around that area during the
> holidays was much worse. The mornings weren't usually too bad during
> the week, but on Saturday and evenings it was an absolute nightmare to
> get to/from work, often taking two hours to get home, sometimes three
> (that was the scenic route over the Mendips!).


Blimey - when I go into the office (Almondbury interchange) and use the back
roads to get home (other side of Bridgewater) it doesn't take 3 hrs! Is the
traffic into WSM that bad on a summer hols Friday?!
 
D

David Martin

Guest
On Aug 15, 5:38 pm, [email protected] wrote:

> I know there's a great tradition of one minute intervals, but would it
> really spoil things that much if for such a long event on an important
> trunk road, they set off at 30 second interals instead? It would halve
> the time it used the road. Might make it more exciting, you'd feel you
> had more chance of catching your "30 second man" than your minuteman.
> Yes, I'm sure this is heresy and it won't happen, but in changing
> times such things should be considered.


Technically it is much harder to do 30 second intervals than it is to
do one minute intervals. With minute intervals there is enough time to
comfortably sort out the next rider, get them set, counted down and
off. Thirty seconds is far too tight and will provide absolutely no
margin for error.

Also, with 30 second intervals you will have more riders passing each
other, which adds to the hazards. Far better to have it at the times
and field sizes dictated by the local police (though why they stopped
us riding on the A90 on a Sunday morning beggars belief - the road is
almost completely deserted then.

...d
 
I

Ian Smith

Guest
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, David Hansen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:59:36 -0000 someone who may be Geoff Lane
> <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>
> >if
> >> someone finally lost their temper and drove over them and their bloody
> >> bicycles it would be hard to condemn them for their actions.

>
> It is always interesting when the mask slips and the "poor
> downtrodden motorist" is revealed in their true form.


Point of order - I don't think it was Geoff that wrote that, but
rather some 'Doddery Wobbler' or something. Geoff merely quoted it.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
 
S

Simon D

Guest
After serious thinking David Martin wrote :
> On Aug 15, 5:38 pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> I know there's a great tradition of one minute intervals, but would it
>> really spoil things that much if for such a long event on an important
>> trunk road, they set off at 30 second interals instead? It would halve
>> the time it used the road. Might make it more exciting, you'd feel you
>> had more chance of catching your "30 second man" than your minuteman.
>> Yes, I'm sure this is heresy and it won't happen, but in changing
>> times such things should be considered.

>
> Technically it is much harder to do 30 second intervals than it is to
> do one minute intervals. With minute intervals there is enough time to
> comfortably sort out the next rider, get them set, counted down and
> off. Thirty seconds is far too tight and will provide absolutely no
> margin for error.
>
> Also, with 30 second intervals you will have more riders passing each
> other, which adds to the hazards. Far better to have it at the times
> and field sizes dictated by the local police (though why they stopped
> us riding on the A90 on a Sunday morning beggars belief - the road is
> almost completely deserted then.
>


I agree with David - 30 second intervals would increase the possibility
of disruption and congestion. In any case, it would be illegal to run a
time trial in this way:

"...each competitor starts at a time which is separated by an interval
of not less than one minute from the starting time of every other
competitor..."
(Cycle Racing on Highways Regulations)
http://www.lvrc.org/documents/road_traffic_act_1960.pdf

--
Simon
 
R

Rob Morley

Guest
In article <[email protected]>, Sir
Jeremy
[email protected] says...
> On 15 Aug, 17:55, "wafflycat" <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com> wrote:
> > > It's not very safe but they have just as much right to be there, sorry.

> >
> > It's actually very safe. The accident rate of time triallists on dual
> > carriageway 'dragstrip' courses is less than on single carriageway
> > 'sporting' courses.

>
> You'd be the first to ***** if a car club decided to start using a
> dual carriageway for a sprint
>
>

Because their insurance wouldn't cover them for it.
 
R

Rob Morley

Guest
In article <[email protected]>, Artleknock
[email protected] says...
> Before I start a rant - I have been a cyclist all my life.
> On Sunday morning the 5th I was driving down the A1 about a couple of
> miles short of the first A1M after Scotch corner when I joined a long
> tail back of traffic. On finaly reaching the hold up it was a bloke on
> a bike, drop handle bars, crash hat, lycra budgie smugglers, the
> works, riding on the carriageway!! A bit further on there was a
> marshal at the next turn off. The idiots were doing time trials on a
> major trunk road on the same day that all the holiday makers were
> heading home from up north.
>


20mph safe stopping distance is 12 metres
70mph safe stopping distance is 96 metres

20/70 x 96/12 = 16/7 so the road has over twice the capacity (that's
throughput, not parking space) at 20mph than it has at 70mph.

2 miles at 70mph takes 103 seconds
2 miles at 20mph takes 360 seconds
so the most that anyone will be delayed is about 4 minutes. That's not
4 minutes sat still in a traffic jam, just 4 minutes driving slowly.

Of course if motorists want to drive unsafely by going too fast or too
close to each other that's not really the cyclist's fault, is it?
 
G

Geoff Lane

Guest
Ian Smith <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, David Hansen <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:59:36 -0000 someone who may be Geoff Lane
>> <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>>
>> >if
>> >> someone finally lost their temper and drove over them and their
>> >> bloody bicycles it would be hard to condemn them for their
>> >> actions.

>>
>> It is always interesting when the mask slips and the "poor
>> downtrodden motorist" is revealed in their true form.

>
> Point of order - I don't think it was Geoff that wrote that, but
> rather some 'Doddery Wobbler' or something. Geoff merely quoted it.


Thank, Ian.

The OP's brief description suggests that it was unsafe to overtake. I
quoted the OP's second para to highlight the motorist's mindset and show
that the cyclists were right to defend against the potentially aggressive
and unsafe overtaking that motorist might have done had they not.

--
Geoff
 
P

Paul Boyd

Guest
Rob Morley said the following on 16/08/2007 11:47:

> 20mph safe stopping distance is 12 metres
> 70mph safe stopping distance is 96 metres
>
> 20/70 x 96/12 = 16/7 so the road has over twice the capacity (that's
> throughput, not parking space) at 20mph than it has at 70mph.


Distance between German car and car in front at 20mph is 2m. Distance
between German car and car in front at 70mph is 2m. So how does speed
affect capacity? :) :)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
P

Paul Boyd

Guest
cupra said the following on 16/08/2007 10:44:

> Blimey - when I go into the office (Almondbury interchange) and use the back
> roads to get home (other side of Bridgewater) it doesn't take 3 hrs! Is the
> traffic into WSM that bad on a summer hols Friday?!


You're going t'other way :)

And no, it wouldn't take 3 hours to get to Almondsbury interchange - I
lived in Hanham, and when the motorways are very slow moving, Bristol
grid-locked[1] - Hanham is the other side of Bristol. Therefore it was
quicker to go over the Mendips and back in via Keynsham. Three hours
was exceptional, but two hours was quite regular - this is going home.
Coming in to Weston, I would often use the back roads to Clevedon, then
hit the M5 to Weston, as that was *usually* marginally better than being
stuck on the A370 with out of sync traffic lights at Congresbury.

It's not so much the traffic into Weston, but the general holiday
traffic all crawling or stopped on the M5 usually from about Gordano to
Bridgwater. At this time of year, we avoid delivering to one particular
customer on Fridays!

[1] one time, I was sat on Coronation road for an hour in traffic,
totally stationary, engine off, lights off and reading a book. Some
pompous cyclist went past and shouted "Lights!"

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
On Aug 16, 7:50 am, Paul Boyd <usenet.is.wor[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] said the following on 15/08/2007 19:14:
>
> > Certainly not on the M5 through Devon and Cornwall,

>
> The M5 barely touches Devon, and doesn't go anywhere near Cornwall :)


Sorry, I meant Somerset. And my knowledge of the Devon/Somerset
boundary is a bit vague, I didn't realise Somerset went so far down.
The south Glos/Bristol/Somerset bit is the worst, it gets better
closer to Devon.

Rob
 
On Aug 16, 11:47 am, Rob Morley <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, Artleknock
> [email protected] says...
>
> > Before I start a rant - I have been a cyclist all my life.
> > On Sunday morning the 5th I was driving down the A1 about a couple of
> > miles short of the first A1M after Scotch corner when I joined a long
> > tail back of traffic. On finaly reaching the hold up it was a bloke on
> > a bike, drop handle bars, crash hat, lycra budgie smugglers, the
> > works, riding on the carriageway!! A bit further on there was a
> > marshal at the next turn off. The idiots were doing time trials on a
> > major trunk road on the same day that all the holiday makers were
> > heading home from up north.

>
> 20mph safe stopping distance is 12 metres
> 70mph safe stopping distance is 96 metres
>
> 20/70 x 96/12 = 16/7 so the road has over twice the capacity (that's
> throughput, not parking space) at 20mph than it has at 70mph.


Twice the capacity if both lanes are used, but I assume the cars stuck
to the right hand lane, so about the same capacity, but still a valid
point. I don't think the cyclists would be at all happy with cars
filling the 1 minute gap between each cyclist.

> 2 miles at 70mph takes 103 seconds
> 2 miles at 20mph takes 360 seconds
> so the most that anyone will be delayed is about 4 minutes. That's not
> 4 minutes sat still in a traffic jam, just 4 minutes driving slowly.


Where does 2 miles come from? This event was on the southbound A1 for
20 miles. That's 40 minutes delay (plus time sitting in the inevitable
queue - even if logically there doesn't have to be one when traffic
slows from 70 to 20, there always is).

Rob
 
A

Alistair Gunn

Guest
[email protected] twisted the electrons to say:
> Agreed. But if we are unreasonable about it, we will be the losers in
> the long run. This is a stretch of fast dual carriageway linking two
> "almost" motorways. I imagine there are people who would like to ban
> us from such roads, we shouldn't given them ammunition by causing 4
> mile tail backs.


So in order to avoid being "banned", the cyclists should voluntarily
"ban" themselves???
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...
 
S

Simon D

Guest
After serious thinking [email protected] wrote :

> I don't think the cyclists would be at all happy with cars
> filling the 1 minute gap between each cyclist.
>


Oh, my! Do you really think the traffic stays behind the riders in a
time trial? It's hard enough persuading them to do that for a
mass-start road race (which definitely wouldn't be allowed onto the A1,
except under very exceptional circumstances, incidentally). This entire
thread seems to be working on this basis, yet actually it's extremely
unusual for a motor vehicle to reduce speed when passing a time
triallist, at least on dual carriageway, let alone wait behind.

That said, although I don't know it well, I seem to remember that the
A1 is very narrow in places, and I do remember passing a club event on
my way to a road race in the north some years ago and noting that wider
(i.e slower) vehicles were having to move into the overtaking lane,
which does clearly have the potential to slow traffic, not to mention
being dangerous in my opinion.

Personally, I believe that the days when major trunk roads were
suitable for time trailling passed a long while ago. I was mainly a
roadie (mass start road racer, for the uninitiated), but did ride time
trials from time to time. I unwisely rode a series of three early
evening ten mile time trials on the A12 at Colchester in 1991. (No
events are held on the A12 now, I believe, and evening time trials were
stopped very soon after these events.) I have rarely been so terrified.

Wafflycat has pointed out the relative accident rates for dual
carriageway and "sporting" courses (although without reference to the
seriousness of the incidents in each case), but the major difference as
a rider is that you are, on dual carriageway, relying on the
attentiveness of a driver who may well be closing on you at 50mph+. You
may be crossing a slip road entrance at which the drivers joining the
carriageway are trying to look behind, to their right and in front of
them in a very short space of time. Your fate is out of your own hands,
and is left to a driver who may or may not be on the ball. Sorry -
these roads are busy and not engineered for cycling, and whether we
have a right to be on them or not their use for time trialling just
isn't sensible in my opinion.

--
Simon
 
On Aug 16, 2:15 pm, Alistair Gunn <[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] twisted the electrons to say:
>
> > Agreed. But if we are unreasonable about it, we will be the losers in
> > the long run. This is a stretch of fast dual carriageway linking two
> > "almost" motorways. I imagine there are people who would like to ban
> > us from such roads, we shouldn't given them ammunition by causing 4
> > mile tail backs.

>
> So in order to avoid being "banned", the cyclists should voluntarily
> "ban" themselves???


No, we should be considerate of other road users as part of the
bargain of wanting them to be considerate of us. A 4 mile queue moving
at say 10 mph would take over 20 minutes to get through. Based on
somebody else's calculations, getting past the cyclists at 20 mph (if
this is what happened) would take an extra 40 minutes, total delay
around an hour.

If the cyclists had set off an hour earlier, traffic would have been
much lighter, delays much less. Was it reasonable of the event
organisers to cause a 1 hour delay so the cyclists could have another
hour in bed?

Rob
 
W

wafflycat

Guest
"Simon D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
terrified.
>
> Wafflycat has pointed out the relative accident rates for dual carriageway
> and "sporting" courses (although without reference to the seriousness of
> the incidents in each case), but the major difference as a rider is that
> you are, on dual carriageway, relying on the attentiveness of a driver who
> may well be closing on you at 50mph+. You may be crossing a slip road
> entrance at which the drivers joining the carriageway are trying to look
> behind, to their right and in front of them in a very short space of time.
> Your fate is out of your own hands, and is left to a driver who may or may
> not be on the ball. Sorry - these roads are busy and not engineered for
> cycling, and whether we have a right to be on them or not their use for
> time trialling just isn't sensible in my opinion.
>
> --
> Simon
>



I would respectfully point out that when cycling, we are always relying on
the attentiveness of a driver who may well be closing on you at 50mph+ -
irrespective of whether you happen to be cycling on a dual or single
carriageway :) I often get drivers going by me at great speed - in excess
of 50mph - when I'm on narrow rural roads and I'm not time trialling.

Having driven along many a dual carriageway when there's been time trials on
them, as a driver they've not bothered me one iota, and that includes the
A1, where I've not ridden a bike but have driven along when there's been a
time trial on - and not as part of taking a rider to an event.
 
C

cupra

Guest
Paul Boyd wrote:
> cupra said the following on 16/08/2007 10:44:
>
>> Blimey - when I go into the office (Almondbury interchange) and use
>> the back roads to get home (other side of Bridgewater) it doesn't
>> take 3 hrs! Is the traffic into WSM that bad on a summer hols
>> Friday?!

>
> You're going t'other way :)
>
> And no, it wouldn't take 3 hours to get to Almondsbury interchange - I
> lived in Hanham, and when the motorways are very slow moving, Bristol
> grid-locked[1] - Hanham is the other side of Bristol. Therefore it
> was quicker to go over the Mendips and back in via Keynsham. Three
> hours was exceptional, but two hours was quite regular - this is
> going home. Coming in to Weston, I would often use the back roads to
> Clevedon, then hit the M5 to Weston, as that was *usually* marginally
> better than being stuck on the A370 with out of sync traffic lights
> at Congresbury.
> It's not so much the traffic into Weston, but the general holiday
> traffic all crawling or stopped on the M5 usually from about Gordano
> to Bridgwater. At this time of year, we avoid delivering to one
> particular customer on Fridays!


That's what does for me if I'm in the office on Fridays - I tend to leave by
3.30 at the latest and occaisionally do the Keynsham -> Wells -> Bridgwater
(not via the A39) route if it's bad....
 
R

Robert Peffers.

Guest
"Martin Dann" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Artleknock wrote:
>> Before I start a rant - I have been a cyclist all my life.
>> On Sunday morning the 5th I was driving down the A1 about a couple of
>> miles short of the first A1M after Scotch corner when I joined a long
>> tail back of traffic. On finaly reaching the hold up it was a bloke on
>> a bike, drop handle bars, crash hat, lycra budgie smugglers, the
>> works, riding on the carriageway!! A bit further on there was a
>> marshal at the next turn off. The idiots were doing time trials on a
>> major trunk road on the same day that all the holiday makers were
>> heading home from up north.

>
> I regularly ride on dual carriage way A roads. In fact I commute to work
> on a dual carriage way. I have no choice about this as my company is
> placed next to a dual carriage way.
>
> Do you object that I have to ride in the carriageway, or do you expect me
> to get off and bow as you pass.
>
> If you truly are a cyclist as you claim, why are you ranting about
> cyclists legally using British roads.

Because, you bloody idiot, the complaint is about the ones illegally using
the roads.