With reference to cycle lanes. etc - report well worth reading, c/o Warrington CC



P

Pyromancer

Guest
Attempting to find the archive of farcilities of the month, I wandered
round the WCC website, and stumbled upon this:

http://www.17beechroad.freeserve.co.uk/WarringtonCycleCampaign/report/Hil
den.pdf

Now *that* sounds like a good plan. How on earth do we get UK towns and
cities to follow suit though? Of is it just one of those cultural
differences between us and the mainlanders that we'll never persuade our
population to act thus?

--
- DJ Pyromancer, The Sunday Goth Social, Leeds. <http://www.sheepish.net>

Broadband, Dialup, Domains = <http://www.wytches.net> = The UK's Pagan ISP!
<http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk> <http://www.revival.stormshadow.com>
 
> Attempting to find the archive of farcilities of the month, I wandered
> round the WCC website, and stumbled upon this:
>
> http://www.17beechroad.freeserve.co.uk/WarringtonCycleCampaign/report/Hil
> den.pdf
>
> Now *that* sounds like a good plan. How on earth do we get UK towns and
> cities to follow suit though?

You're right, it does look pretty good. But it is completely destroyed for
anyone who knows anything about promoting and providing for cyclists by
being liberally sprinkled with pictures of cyclists with helmets.
 
Rich wrote:
> > Attempting to find the archive of farcilities of the month, I wandered
> > round the WCC website, and stumbled upon this:
> >
> > http://www.17beechroad.freeserve.co.uk/WarringtonCycleCampaign/report/Hil
> > den.pdf
> >
> > Now *that* sounds like a good plan. How on earth do we get UK towns and
> > cities to follow suit though?
>
> You're right, it does look pretty good. But it is completely destroyed for
> anyone who knows anything about promoting and providing for cyclists by
> being liberally sprinkled with pictures of cyclists with helmets.

I thought this quote was interesting:

"Our off road facilities are useful, but our major objective is to get
cyclists onto the roads. Here they are safer and have a calming effect
on vehicle speeds. most cycle accidents occur on off-road routes and
result from car owners reversing into cyclists when coming out of their
drives"

and

"Hilden has spent less and 120,000 Euros in [the] whole of the last 10
years on cycle specific facilities".

And yet they've managed to get cycle use up to 24%

Tim.
 
[email protected] wrote:

> I thought this quote was interesting:
>
> "Our off road facilities are useful, but our major objective is to get
> cyclists onto the roads. Here they are safer and have a calming effect
> on vehicle speeds. most cycle accidents occur on off-road routes and
> result from car owners reversing into cyclists when coming out of their
> drives"
>
> and
>
> "Hilden has spent less and 120,000 Euros in [the] whole of the last 10
> years on cycle specific facilities".
>
> And yet they've managed to get cycle use up to 24%

There is one overwhelming factor in this, it seems - they restricted
motor traffic to 30kph (18.5mph). If we did that in any town here, and
enforced it, and didn't manage to provoke mass rioting in the process,
we could do the same thing.
 
Rich wrote:
> > But it is completely destroyed for
> anyone who knows anything about promoting and providing for cyclists by
> being liberally sprinkled with pictures of cyclists with helmets.

'Completely destroyed' !?! Get a life - it's just a little logo - no
wonder we're not getting anywhere :(
 
"squeaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Rich wrote:
>> > But it is completely destroyed for
>> anyone who knows anything about promoting and providing for cyclists by
>> being liberally sprinkled with pictures of cyclists with helmets.
>
> 'Completely destroyed' !?! Get a life - it's just a little logo - no
> wonder we're not getting anywhere :(

I beg to differ. It's the big pic on the cover and it's on every page, and
it sends the insidious message that cycling is dangerous.

If it's just a little logo, why couldn't they use a sensible one?

Yes, it's no wonder we're not getting anywhere when even cyclists are
willing to show cycling as being so dangerous that you have to wear special
"safety" gear, the only effect of which is to put people off cycling.

>
 
Rich wrote:
> "s
> Yes, it's no wonder we're not getting anywhere when even cyclists are
> willing to show cycling as being so dangerous that you have to wear special
> "safety" gear, the only effect of which is to put people off cycling.


If you know anything about the Warrington Cycle campaign you'd know that
they are as aware of the helmets issues as anyone. Photos, drawings etc
tend to reflect reality - some cyclists wear helmets, some don't. In
terms of what's been achieved in Hilden its a side issue.

The problem I have with the German approach to road safety is that they
have consistently refused to impose speed limits on autobahns, in
defiance of EU policy. This enables their auto industry to produce ever
faster vehicles with which the rest of the world has to compete. Thus,
they subject the rest of us to the tyranny of speed whilst ensuring that
their own communities are protected.

Simon
 
> Thus,
> they subject the rest of us to the tyranny of speed whilst ensuring that
> their own communities are protected.

Protected by what? The cars are only allowed to do go at silly speeds in
Germany - seems like we're protected and they're not.
 
Simon Geller wrote:

> The problem I have with the German approach to road safety is that they
> have consistently refused to impose speed limits on autobahns, in
> defiance of EU policy. This enables their auto industry to produce ever
> faster vehicles with which the rest of the world has to compete. Thus,
> they subject the rest of us to the tyranny of speed whilst ensuring that
> their own communities are protected.

People have always wanted to go fast and always will. It's the 18.5mph
limit in towns like Hilden that makes the difference, not how fast they
go on their motorways.

A convincing case could probably be made for reducing all UK town
limits to 20mph, with continuous constant camera enforcement
everywhere, in "exchange" for raising the general motorway speed limits
to 100 or 120mph. That would give the motoring speed lobby what the
they want while making town roads everywhere vastly safer for everyone.

BTW, ISTR the fastest production car in the world is British, not
German (and the parent company is American). Jaguar XJ220, 220mph.
 
Tom wrote:
> Pyromancer <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Simon Geller wrote:
>>
>>
>> BTW, ISTR the fastest production car in the world is British, not
>> German (and the parent company is American). Jaguar XJ220, 220mph.
>
> McLaren F1 240.1 mph

<anorak> The Bugatti Veyron is apparently good for 252 </anorak>

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
In article <[email protected]>, Peter Clinch
([email protected]) wrote:
> Tom wrote:
> > Pyromancer <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Simon Geller wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> BTW, ISTR the fastest production car in the world is British, not
> >> German (and the parent company is American). Jaguar XJ220, 220mph.
> >
> > McLaren F1 240.1 mph
>
> <anorak> The Bugatti Veyron is apparently good for 252 </anorak>

And is built in France, by a German-owned company, using the name of an
Italian who moved to Germany to build motorcars but found himself in
France after the First Great Unpleasantness.

My grate frend gNick worked on the design of its gearbox.

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
Do not top-post like a Cretinous Foul-Yob fit only for Stoning.
 
In article <[email protected]>, Tom
(Don'[email protected]) wrote:
> Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > <anorak> The Bugatti Veyron is apparently good for 252 </anorak>
> >
> >
>
> <pedant> The Bugatti Veyron is not, and probably never will be a production
> car (i.e. One hundred sold)</pedant>

<petrolhead>
McLaren F1: 64 standard, 5 LMs, 3 GTs, 28 GTRs. Total 100
</petrolhead>

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
Better hide the pork scratchings...
 
Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote:
> Take that up with wikipedia...
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugatti_Veyron
>

"Bugatti originally planned to build 300 Veyrons over five years. However,
with just 30 to 40 sold as of December 2005, production is now expected to
last for eight years. It is not clear how many have yet been built or
whether any are in the hands of customers"

So still not a "production" car

However I was not aware that any had been manufactured for private
ownership, so on that point I stand corrected.

Tom

--
Return address is dead. Real address is at
http://toomanybikes.com/address.jpg
 
Tom wrote:

> So still not a "production" car

Though hardly likely that it will "never be one" if they're in
production for 8 years and selling in double figures so far.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Tom wrote:
>
>> So still not a "production" car
>
> Though hardly likely that it will "never be one" if they're in production
> for 8 years and selling in double figures so far.
>

You're quite possibly right, but if they are losing £4.5 million on each
one I bet they don't want to be :)

Tom

--
Return address is dead. Real address is at
http://toomanybikes.com/address.jpg
 
Pyromancer wrote:

> in "exchange" for raising the general motorway speed limits
> to 100 or 120mph.

Which would result in far more accidents, as the closing speeds between
chav-rep-racer-tossers doing the obligatory (speed limit + 30 mph) and
an artic lumbering up the hill is going to double to be around 100 mph.

It would also reduce the road capacity by a factor of around four (since
safe separation distance goes roughly as kinetic energy), thus
increasing traffic jams.

It would also make ever more intolerable anyone living near a motorway;
the M1 has sections where the traffic noise drowns out soft conversation
outdoors around a mile away *already*.

And then there's chemical pollution, noise pollution, petrol
consumption, &c, &c.

Daft idea, sorry.

R.
 
Richard wrote:
> Pyromancer wrote:
>
>> in "exchange" for raising the general motorway speed limits
>> to 100 or 120mph.
....
>
> It would also reduce the road capacity by a factor of around four (since
> safe separation distance goes roughly as kinetic energy), thus
> increasing traffic jams.

Unless more roads are built, of course.

> It would also make ever more intolerable anyone living near a motorway;
> the M1 has sections where the traffic noise drowns out soft conversation
> outdoors around a mile away *already*.

If an adequate motorway /network/ was built the traffic would be spread
more thinly, thus the M1 would be quieter.

> And then there's chemical pollution, noise pollution, petrol
> consumption, &c, &c.

Caused by congestion, caused by the lack of an adequate motorway network.

--
Matt B
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

WillemJM
Powertap reference needed, please
Replies
0
Views
401
Cycling Equipment
WillemJM
WillemJM
E
Tour de France reference....
Replies
3
Views
418
Bike Cafe
steve
steve
M
32h/36h rim reference
Replies
6
Views
377
UK and Europe
Simon Brooke
S
L
Study reference
Replies
8
Views
365
UK and Europe
LSMike
L
gholl
Power output/ weight Reference
Replies
9
Views
2K
Power meters
acoggan
acoggan
C
The RBR Reference List
Replies
1
Views
393
Road Cycling
Sierraman
S
P
The RBR Reference List
Replies
55
Views
2K
Road Cycling
gwhite
G
N
An Old Reference to Segregation
Replies
0
Views
444
UK and Europe
[Not Responding]
N
D
Historical reference
Replies
7
Views
433
Cycling Equipment
Jeff Wills
J
P
Is there a quick reference list for ride leaders?
Replies
2
Views
485
UK and Europe
Just Zis Guy
J
Top Bottom Back