Yet Another Cycling Forum
Random Musings => Gallery => Topic started by: David Martin on 27 April, 2009, 09:53:33 am
-
For classic examples of design stuidity.
From the peoples republic of Bangor..
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3647/3479604846_730db81133.jpg?v=0)
-
Did they really mean to put that sign there? I suspect they looked in their stock to see what "warning cyclists" signs they had in the bunker and this is what they found.
IMHO the sign for look out for cyclists and no cycling are way too similar and I bet a lot of drivers don't know the difference.
-
Did they really mean to put that sign there? I suspect they looked in their stock to see what "warning cyclists" signs they had in the bunker and this is what they found.
IMHO the sign for look out for cyclists and no cycling are way too similar and I bet a lot of drivers don't know the difference.
It took me a while to work it out. On the back is a shared use path sign, so i presume the 'no cycling' applies to the narrow strip of overgrown bumpy tarmac, and the NCN directions to the adjacent road.
But it makes a good photo.
-
It's a standard sustrans sign :demon:
I'll take your sign and add a 'no motor vehicles' to it (http://nuttycyclist.co.uk/cycling/farcilities-signs-sustrans.htm)
-
Someone has painted an enormous CDC on the one I use to leave work. Photo later this week, hopefully.
-
Yebbut, they both have a bicycle and red round the edge. You expecting the half-awake meathead chatting on his phone in a car to do geometry as well? :o
-
Yeah I can understand why a lot of people don't understand the no cycling sign, because all the no smoking signs I see around have a nice red line through it.
no smoking signs - Google Image Search (http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=no+smoking+signs&ndsp=21&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=com.ubuntu:en-GB:unofficial&sa=N&um=1&imgcolor=red)
-
IMHO the sign for look out for cyclists and no cycling are way too similar and I bet a lot of drivers don't know the difference.
Really? Warnings are mostly triangular whereas prohibitions are mostly circular.
And the no right- / left- / u- turn signs with the line through are therefore a double negative, so maybe the cabbies have been getting it right all these years? :)
-
For classic examples of design stuidity.
From the peoples republic of Bangor..
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3647/3479604846_730db81133.jpg?v=0)
Does the sign refer to the footpath/cyclepath, the road or both?
There is no way of knowing.
Sustrans cycle route 51 sends you through Bicester and through a pedestrian area. (Can't remember whether its a no entry or no cycling sign now though)
It also goes through Milton Keynes shopping centre with, "No cycling on footway," signs which are blue rectangles with white writing, so reccommendatory. I've never worked out whether it is only a footway or a shared use cycle path.
-
IMHO the sign for look out for cyclists and no cycling are way too similar and I bet a lot of drivers don't know the difference.
Really? Warnings are mostly triangular whereas prohibitions are mostly circular.
More than half of British motorists cannot interpret road signs properly, according to an RAC survey in 2001, and I doubt it's improved since.
(http://www.opakovanie.sk/naviac/lester/yacf/cyclesigns.gif)
They are too similar. It's ridiculous that the no-cycling sign doesn't have a line through it.
-
It's not ridiculous, it's identical to all the other prohibitory signs.
e.g. "No motor vehicles" - the famous circle with a motorbike leaping over a car.
-
....I agree that a diagonal line through prohibition signs would make their message more obvious.
So what's this one then :demon:
(http://www.driving-test-success.com/uk-road-signs-orders/end-of-min.gif)
-
It's not ridiculous, it's identical to all the other prohibitory signs.
Helloo....
(http://s114940310.websitehome.co.uk/MOHSG/Images/Clipart/NO%20LEFT%20TURN.gif)
It is ridiculous that they don't all have lines through them.
The Australian one:
(http://gettingworse.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/cyclesprohibited.jpg)
-
I'm sorry, that picture obscured behind the thick red line looks similar to the French moped logo (from memory, which is what I go from when on the road), is it bicycles prohibited or scooters prohibited.
I seem to recall the only difference is the picture of the moped's engine.
Please leave the pictures clear and not obfsucated.
-
(http://gettingworse.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/cyclesprohibited.jpg)
Looks like a bicycle to me
and a sign that means no cycling.
-
(http://gettingworse.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/cyclesprohibited.jpg)
Looks like a bicycle to me
and a sign that means no cycling.
No, it is a sign which has a picture of not cycling in a sign which means the activity is prohibited. So no not cycling, or in other words, get on your bike.
;D
..d
-
Yebbut, they both have a bicycle and red round the edge. You expecting the half-awake meathead chatting on his phone in a car to do geometry as well? :o
Are you telling me that you can't tell the difference between round and triangular wheels on your bike? ;D
I'm not in a car, though...
-
You expecting the half-awake meathead chatting on his phone in a car to do geometry as well? :o
Hmm, you have a point. Perhaps a GCSE module on top tube angles would help? ;D
-
Sign language: week 48 - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/picturegalleries/5278200/Sign-language-week-48.html)
-
Sign language: week 48 - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/picturegalleries/5278200/Sign-language-week-48.html)
You might notice that both this fine example and David's original example both come from NCN route 5 on the North Wales coast, possibly the country's shittest cycle route. There is an excellent section of NCN 5 between Prestatyn and Rhyl where it runs along the seafront - complete with sand and a banking camber that wouldn't be out of place in a velodrome.
-
[the country's shittest cycle route.
No chance - it can't possibly be as bad as NCN1 in North Kent. ;D
-
Mobile phone pics, so do excuse quality:
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p96/edd_o_brain/Image017.jpg)
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p96/edd_o_brain/Image019.jpg)
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p96/edd_o_brain/Image020.jpg)
Not so much a bad facility (tho I do think they are pointless) but a typical abuse of it. All the above taken on Old Hall Road in Sale in between the junctions of Dane Road and Wythenshawe Road.
And here is Greater Manchester Police's attempt at secure cycle parking:
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p96/edd_o_brain/Image007.jpg?t=1242137179)
-
The parking is fairly typical of any facility anywhere, though, isn't it? I guess that the Police will be too busy to do anything about anyone parking there.
Meanwhile, I can see that GMP aren't quite busy enough, so are giving the local la's a bit of a chance to bump up the theft stats ::-)
-
ed, I don't believe that car is parked illegaly - which is part of our problem, of course.
-
ed, I don't believe that car is parked illegaly - which is part of our problem, of course.
It's parked in a cycle lane to the the left of the hatched markings...
-
A cycle lane marked with DOTTED lines, not a solid line.
-
I can't see enough to determine that.
-
The second photo shows it's not a solid line. There's no white line for a short section in front of the car. Google satellite view shows it as dotted clicky (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=old+hall+road,+sale&sll=53.800651,-4.042969&sspn=19.196147,44.824219&ie=UTF8&ll=53.423542,-2.295822&spn=0.000589,0.001368&t=h&z=20)
Given the amount of crap on the kerbed-off bit I wouldn't touch it with a Schwalbe Marathon Plus covered barge pole anyway.
And anyone who enters the that cycle lane and then gets "stuck" deserves to be shot for complete lack of forward observation. :)
-
Yup. I wouldn't use it anyway, and thanks for clearing up its status.
But there are lots of cyclists who do use facilities that are there,and they ought to be respected. I don't want them giving up because cycling's 'too dangerous' or 'too hard'
-
ed, I don't believe that car is parked illegaly - which is part of our problem, of course.
It's parked in a cycle lane to the the left of the hatched markings...
HWC says "see Rule 130" for hatched white diagonal stripes.
"
130
Areas of white diagonal stripes or chevrons painted on the road. These are to separate traffic lanes or to protect traffic turning right.
* if the area is bordered by a broken white line, you should not enter the area unless it is necessary and you can see that it is safe to do so
* if the area is marked with chevrons and bordered by solid white lines you MUST NOT enter it except in an emergency
"
Nothing about not parking there because of the hatchings.
Rule 240 says you "MUST NOT stop or park on ... a tram or cycle lane during its period of operation, a cycle track".
Rule 243 says "DO NOT stop or park ... where you would obstruct cyclists’ use of cycle facilities except when forced to do so by stationary traffic"
Rule 243 isn't law though, and Rule 240 has so many references I can't be arsed to look up the right one.
-
I can't see enough to determine that.
Second photo really clear, gaps to front and rear of the car. Third photo, you can see the end of the painted line if you look carefully (closest to camera).
-
I hadn't seen the gap behind the vehicle, cause my window isn't wide enough. Yeah, it's dotted, but the issue of the hatching applies. I don't believe even half of drivers know what hatching & yellow boxes mean.
-
Rule 130 means its prefectly OK to drive in that cycle lane, but rule 240 clearly states MUST NOT stop or park.
I hadn't realised that before. If that's the case, why do any cycle lanes need double yellow lines in them?
-
I hadn't seen the gap behind the vehicle, cause my window isn't wide enough. Yeah, it's dotted, but the issue of the hatching applies. I don't believe even half of drivers know what hatching & yellow boxes mean.
I think that's down to interpretation ;)
Rule 130 that Greenbank posted says "if the area is bordered by a broken white line, you should not enter the area unless it is necessary and you can see that it is safe to do so"
Some drivers would consider that as "should not enter" others interpret that as "I'm overtaking, therefore it's necessary to enter".
As a cyclist I get cross that drivers don't enter the hatched area to pass me. As a motorcyclist I appreciate the motorcycle lane that council have painted. I could pass by squeezing past the traffic in the lane, but it's safer to enter the hatched areas.
In my discussions with highway engineers they too call the hatched area "motorcycle lane", which is why they install bollards in some of them.
-
Mobile phone pics, so do excuse quality:
And here is Greater Manchester Police's attempt at secure cycle parking:
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p96/edd_o_brain/Image007.jpg?t=1242137179)
I may be overlooking the obvious but, what is the problem with this? Frame locked with sturdy D lock. Wheels secured to D lock with cable ???
-
I'm guessing it's because you that wall hook looks like it could be prised out with minimal force, just a basic bit of leverage.
Those Kryptoflex cables are pants too. When my D-lock siezed up and refused to open I cut through the kryptoflex cable in about 20 seconds with a pair of normal wire cutters. It took the LBS 10 minutes with an angle grinder to get through the lock (they commented on how tough it was to remove).
If I have to leave my bike locked out on the street then it gets locked to something secure, D-lock through railing/stand/etc, rear wheel and round the seat-tube of the frame.
Front wheel is protected by either a Pitlock skewer or another D-lock through wheel and down-tube.
I only use a Kryptoflex cable (in conjunction with D-lock) for the pub after football on a Tuesday night. Only there for an hour or so, and just used to lock the bike to something (a bench) that's in view of me inside the pub (everything solid/secure enough would be out of line of sight).
-
As you say, a Kryptoflex cable isn't brilliant, but it's could be adequate depending on the situation, so whether this is suitable or not probably depends on context.
If this photo is taken outside of the main door to Manchester's central police station, then I'd say that it's probably over-locked. ;D
My bike at work is locked with a Kryptonite New York Fahgettaboudit U-lock on the front wheel, a Kryptonite New York Fahgettaboudit chain on the rear wheel, frame and around a suitable heavy immovable object, and a very thin Kryptoflex on the saddle (which came with a QR, not my choice). This is inside a secure store that has two access controlled doors on it. I'm paranoid I am. :)
-
And here is Greater Manchester Police's attempt at secure cycle parking:
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p96/edd_o_brain/Image007.jpg?t=1242137179)
Is this so bad?
It's (presumably) short term parking for punters just popping into the nick. I'd say that a secure point is fine for this short stay parking and gets round the "there's no space/money/will" for a proper Sheffield.
One assumes that the coppers who commute in have better, more secure long term parking somewhere out of sight.
-
There are an awful lot of otherwise perfectly adequate locks that couldn't go through that pathetic ring. Besides, it's too high anyway, as you probably want to get your frame & front wheel.
Rubbish facility, ill-thought out, probably designed/approved by someone who hasn't ridden a bike since their mum sold their Chopper in 1978.
-
TBH, it is probably designed for something else but some crafty copper/ PCSO is using it to secure their patrol bike.
-
TBH, it is probably designed for something else but some crafty copper/ PCSO is using it to secure their patrol bike.
Dog leads. You can tie your canine to the wall whilst you do whatever it is you want without the mutt underfoot.
-
Another classic design fail from Southend, which I just posted over in my bikeability thread.
One way I can ride to work is through this.
(http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q273/nuttycyclist/cycling/KIF_5669.jpg)
But that is better than the other side of the road which I'll have to cycle through on the way home.
(http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q273/nuttycyclist/cycling/KIF_5668.jpg)
-
Vélos interdits de piste cyclable à Marseille (http://www.warning-radar.com/actus/velos-interdits-de-piste-cyclable-a-marseille,1199.html)
-
New York
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3653/3649361597_37c040daa5.jpg?v=0)
Apologies for the quality - it's under a bridge and I was shooting into the light
-
AN unusual one - Fareham and Crofton Cricket Club setting up their tables onthe cycle path.... but apparently its OK because they "Only block the pedestrian part!"
(http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b60/Cunobelin/CricketClub1001.png)
-
This appears to be Merton's cock up of a response to my being knocked off by a speeding driver... ::-)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v326/ado15/Manship.jpg)
-
This appears to be Merton's cock up of a response to my being knocked off by a speeding driver... ::-)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v326/ado15/Manship.jpg)
WTF is that supposed to meen? What a seriously bizarre setup.
-
There is a cyclist illegally riding on the pavement near the cycle route sign ::-). The pavement has a no cycling sign, despite being marked on some of the maps as the cycle route and is fairly widely used. The road has painted cycles all the way along to where it legally joins that path. I think the council probably intended to put up the triangular warning sign, rather than the forbidding circular one ::-), but I might be over-estimating their competance. :-X The 20 limit and the no cycling sign appeared by the Monday after Clarion's off on the Thursday. :-\ The cycle route sign was already there, with repeaters all the way along the road.
-
They cannot implement a "No Cycling" sign without all the relevant legislation (as I understand it).
That cannot have been applied for in the time between now and the bump.
Clarion, ask to see the relevant paperwork regarding that sign, and also get confirmation that it was erected NOW. If the driver's insurers see that they could claim it was all your fault for riding illegally.
-
Good point. I'm writing to them anyway, but I shall make a note of those points.
-
Not a farcility as such, but at the gate of a park where bike rides for the Wandle Festival assembled. Just felt it slightly ironic.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v326/ado15/PICT0662.jpg)
-
(http://gettingworse.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/cyclesprohibited.jpg)
Looks like a bicycle to me
and a sign that means no cycling.
No, it is a sign which has a picture of not cycling in a sign which means the activity is prohibited. So no not cycling, or in other words, get on your bike.
;D
..d
No, Britain has decided to follow a stupid signage practice. The diagonal bar (common in countries other than Britain) makes it quite clear that 'whatever' is prohibited.
-
(http://gettingworse.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/cyclesprohibited.jpg)
Looks like a bicycle to me
and a sign that means no cycling.
No, it is a sign which has a picture of not cycling in a sign which means the activity is prohibited. So no not cycling, or in other words, get on your bike.
;D
..d
No, Britain has decided to follow a stupid signage practice. The diagonal bar (common in countries other than Britain) makes it quite clear that 'whatever' is prohibited.
To be fair to Britain, it is actually following the international convention of road signage. It's other countries which aren't...
But then again the international convention is a bit daft and illogical.
-
Did anyone on the Dun Run notice the pointless 10-yard psyclepath at the A12 Darsham turning?
-
I present the wondrous cycling farcilities on St Mary's Island Gillingham, where the cycle path changes from one side of the pavement to the other.
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y19/BobJ/Cycling/DSCI0027.jpg)
-
If someone could sort out this image for me-
Google Maps (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&tab=wl)
If you zoom in to just east of where the road goes under the railway line, you will see that the eejit Council eiter ran out of paint or clues. The compulsory cycle lane solid white line stops but there is still a cycle image painted on the road. This is within the section of A$ Bath Road that has a solid white line to stop traffic crossing into the opposing carriageway. it effectively makes that few yards of A4 the best compulsory cycle lane in the country ;D
Oh well, forget sorting the image. How do you do a map capture from Google maps so that it takes you straight to the bit of image you want?
-
Mobile phone pics, so do excuse quality:
And here is Greater Manchester Police's attempt at secure cycle parking:
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p96/edd_o_brain/Image007.jpg?t=1242137179)
I may be overlooking the obvious but, what is the problem with this? Frame locked with sturdy D lock. Wheels secured to D lock with cable ???
Because of the raised loop the shackle is exposed to jacking. The shackle should be full of frame and wheel thus leaving little or no room for a toerag to try jacking etc. The loop should be positioned just above the height of a typical front mech and sufficiently clear of the wall so that when in use the lock can pass though loop, frame and rear wheel.
-
How do you do a map capture from Google maps so that it takes you straight to the bit of image you want?
Click the button near the top right called "Link" to get a useful URL.
-
How do you do a map capture from Google maps so that it takes you straight to the bit of image you want?
Click the button near the top right called "Link" to get a useful URL.
Thanks Biggsy!
here (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=approach+road+taplow&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=12.396752,28.168945&ie=UTF8&ll=51.522301,-0.688358&spn=0.000398,0.001368&t=k&z=20)
Look at the westbound section just past the sideroad where the cars are turning into. A cycle lane marker with no line until the middle of the road!
-
There are a few cycle symbols without lane lines in London now. While I'm not sure what they're supposed to mean exactly, they are preferable to cycle lanes, I think. Cyclists are encouraged to think about their position more for themselves, and motorists are reminded that they are sharing the road (or the lane) with cyclists.
-
They indicate cycle routes.
-
I've seen them on big main roads that I didn't even know were part of a "cycle route", if they are.
Anyway I always get lost when I try to follow one of those blue-sign routes. You eventually reach a junction without a sign or anything painted on the road, so have to take pot luck unless you already know the area well, in which case you wouldn't need a marked route at all.
-
Always worth picking up the free TfL maps when you see them in a bike shop (On Your Bike in Tooley St, near London Bridge has a particularly good stock). Blue signs are often removed/turned/otherwise vandalised/not posted adequately in the first place. Someimes you will see a sticker on a lamppost about 30m up the road you should have turned into and no other signage.
-
I got the full set of maps out of curiosity but wouldn't bother to actually take one out with me for anything other than a special occasion.
It defeats the object of a marked route if you have to stop and study a map to make up for a missing sign. It's a stupid idea unless done properly. That means putting up enough signs in the first place and regularly checking them afterwards.
-
I dunno. Yesterday we drove from Oswestry back to south london. The signs weren't enough; we had to use maps. Yes, I'd prefer that the TfL routes were better signposted (and had fewer tandem traps ::-) ), but I'm happy with the maps. :)
-
... Blue signs are often removed/turned/otherwise vandalised/not posted adequately in the first place. Someimes you will see a sticker on a lamppost about 30m up the road you should have turned into and no other signage.
I think this is partially because only the council (or someone approved to do work for them) can do things like put up signage, but a local Sustrans Ranger can put up a sticker on a lamppost. Didn't Oscars Dad say something about this in one of his posts about being a ranger?
-
Time for a thread resurrection.
NCN Route 5 where it passes over Deepmoor Drain and the River Penk in Stafford. ~180 meter span of bridge. Not sure these two signs even belong together?
(https://cdn.biscuit.ninja/img/random/ncnRoute5CyclistsDismount.jpg)
Tixall Road, Stafford.
It's beggars belief that on-road parking is provided but along that stretch of road, only 2 vehicles were parked fully within the on-road parking - one of those being a Ford Transit sized pick-up. Over 2 dozen vehicles were parked partially or fully blocking the cycle path.
(https://cdn.biscuit.ninja/img/random/tixallRoadStaffordVehiclesParkedOnCycleFarcility1.jpg)
(https://cdn.biscuit.ninja/img/random/tixallRoadStaffordVehiclesParkedOnCycleFarcility2.jpg)
Further north along that same road, there is some discontinuous cycle lane:
(https://cdn.biscuit.ninja/img/random/tixallRoadStaffordVehcilesParkedInCycleLane.jpg)
-
Time for a thread resurrection.
NCN Route 5 where it passes over Deepmoor Drain and the River Penk in Stafford. ~180 meter span of bridge. Not sure these two signs even belong together?
(https://cdn.biscuit.ninja/img/random/ncnRoute5CyclistsDismount.jpg)
The cycle part of the top sign looks lopsided.
-
Time for a thread resurrection.
NCN Route 5 where it passes over Deepmoor Drain and the River Penk in Stafford. ~180 meter span of bridge. Not sure these two signs even belong together?
(https://cdn.biscuit.ninja/img/random/ncnRoute5CyclistsDismount.jpg)
The cycle part of the top sign looks lopsided.
It's an indication of how to pass someone coming the other way