Sustrans routes

"Stevie D" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

IMHO, mixing horses and bikes on the same path is Not A Good Idea,

Agreed.

Quoted message said:

Which is exactly what bridleways are used to permit.

And still do permit. However, bridlepaths were, like footpaths, closed to cyclists. In effect we
have, fairly recently, been permitted to use them.

Quoted message said:

Usually on much less suitable tracks, narrower and without adequate surface, and certainly not
enough room to pass horses comfortably while moving and without either party having to stop or
deviate from the path.

On bridlepaths cyclists are, AIUI, required to give way to pedestrians and horses.

Quoted message said:

It is essential that cyclists, pedestrians - everyone! - is careful around horses,

Given the size, power and general skitishness of horses and the general mental instability of their
riders that is excellent advice.

Isn't a definition of a horse something like 'large, smelly, dangerous at both ends, uncomfortable
in the middle and riden by an arrogant idiot who thinks they own the place (and often does)'.

Quoted message said:

but as long as the law allows them to share the same space, we have to find the best way to let
them get by.

And, AIUI, the law is fairly clear -- on bridlepaths they have the right of way and we have
to give way.

T

RJ Webb said:

Quoted message said:

I still use my Galaxy in much the same way -- never too worried about taking it up a bridle path
or farm track on its 32 mm tyres -- and its done Sustrans & towpath crushed grit on 25 mm boots
without problems (though with a higher puncture count).

Still my only bike, and I survived a mixed bridleway and road run round Monmouthshire yesterday..
It was hedgeclipping central, but I got away with it.

I have yet to meet any Sustrans surfaces that are a problem.. Plenty that are slow, but nowt to
worry the wheels.

But should that be the measurement used to define "ok"? I could use part of a Sustrans route to work
( Route 4 between Aberkenfig and Pyle) but the route is unduly hilly , slow and uncomfortable on
32mm tyres on a Galaxy, IMHO it's not OK. So instead I parallel the route for most of it, cross it
once and rejoin at Penybryn, the road I use is quite, smooth and safer than the Sustrans route ( For
anyone using Route 4 turn right, then left at the Wildlife Centre and rejoin just before the A48)
for the life of me I can't see the point of this 4 miles of poor track apart from having somewhere
for dogs to [censored].

--
Marc Please note this is now a redundant email address. Add an extra c at the end of marc to email.

"marc" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

But should that be the measurement used to define "ok"? I could use part of a Sustrans route to
work ( Route 4 between Aberkenfig and Pyle) but the route is unduly hilly , slow and uncomfortable
on 32mm tyres on a Galaxy, IMHO it's not OK. So instead I parallel the route for most of it, cross
it once and rejoin at Penybryn, the road I use is quite, smooth and safer than the Sustrans route
( For anyone using Route 4 turn right, then left at the Wildlife Centre and rejoin just before the
A48) for the life of me I can't see the point of this 4 miles of poor track apart from having
somewhere for dogs to [censored].

It depends what Sustrans routes are for. If they are meant to be an alternative transport network
then there may be an argument for tarmacing them all (money permitting) and turning them into a
'motorway system' for cyclists.

That does not, however, seem to be what they are for. They seem to be primarily a network of off
road cycle tracks for the leisure cyclist. As such, cinder surfaces are fine.

Most of the routes are less than direct -- so they are not really suited to the cyclist wanting to
get from A-B by the shortest, fastest route. In most places an on road route will be more direct and
faster. (There are exceptions -- Northampton to Market Harborough is along a rail bed -- so is
straight and level. But this is hardly a major commuter artery!!)

To some extent the Sustrans routes are for leisure cyclists and undoubtedly the vast majority of
people who cycle them do so for leisure rather than utility. Of course, you can argue that its a
chicken & egg question -- while the routes are cinder top utility cyclists will find better routes
whereas with blacktop they may use the tracks for utility cycling -- but it would be a hard sell.

T

Tony W said:

Quoted message said:

But should that be the measurement used to define "ok"? I could use part of a Sustrans route to
work ( Route 4 between Aberkenfig and Pyle) but the route is unduly hilly , slow and
uncomfortable on 32mm tyres on a Galaxy, IMHO it's not OK. So instead I parallel the route for
most of it, cross it once and rejoin at Penybryn, the road I use is quite, smooth and safer than
the Sustrans route ( For anyone using Route 4 turn right, then left at the Wildlife Centre and
rejoin just before the A48) for the life of me I can't see the point of this 4 miles of poor
track apart from having somewhere for dogs to [censored].

It depends what Sustrans routes are for. If they are meant to be an alternative transport network
then there may be an argument for tarmacing them all (money permitting) and turning them into a
'motorway system' for cyclists.

That does not, however, seem to be what they are for. They seem to be primarily a network of off
road cycle tracks for the leisure cyclist. As such, cinder surfaces are fine.

I obviously didn't get my point across, I accept that they are meant for the leisure cyclist, but in
this instance ( maybe it's the only one?) instead of 3-4 miles of mixed tarmac /gravel route that
meanders needlessly up and down, created 50% from scratch that serves no real need, they could have
painted two more stencilled signs on the road and used the quiet country lane that it ends up on.
Methinks there is something to do with LA spending and budgets being available to keep LA employees
working tied up here somewhere.

--
Marc Please note this is now a redundant email address. Add an extra c at the end of marc to email.

"marc" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I obviously didn't get my point across,

Thanks for the clarification. Based on your description I would agree.

T