Yet Another Cycling Forum

General Category => On The Road => Topic started by: hubner on October 21, 2018, 11:46:50 am

Title: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: hubner on October 21, 2018, 11:46:50 am
On my commute I use a few shared use paths (cyclists and pedestrians only): one through a large park and a long one built on top of a sewage pipe. I'm not including bits of pavement which are deemed to be shared use because the road is simply too unpleasant to ride on.

I see a lot of unnecessary and fast close passes by cyclists of pedestrians but the strange thing is not many if any at all of the pedestrians seem to be bothered, they don't flinch or turn their heads in reaction, it's as if nothing's happened.

On the other hand, there's another path which is quite narrow and twisting and the pedestrians do seem to be aware of the dickhead cyclists who seem to ride at their fastest speed regardless of anyone else around them.

Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: CAMRAMan on October 21, 2018, 01:29:50 pm
Nowadays, I assume that every ped I pass on a shared use path is zombified by the use of earphones. I still ring my bell, but usually get no response, and yes, they don't seem to flinch that often, but I do allow plenty of room.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: hubner on October 21, 2018, 01:58:02 pm
Examples:

A rider is in front of me riding in the same direction, riding on the left, directly ahead is a ped walking  in the same direction.
There's no one else around, the path is fairly wide but the rider maintains their speed moves right slightly and passes with about a person's width gap or closer. At the passing point the rider is still well left of the centre of the path.

I'm passing with ped to the right and ped to the left, I slow down to try to avoid close passing and leave as big as a gap as possible, but at the passing point another rider blasts through one of  the gaps from behind.

A ped is directly ahead walking  in the same direction, I move right to pass fairly late to avoid going near other peds, as I'm moving right another rider comes up directly from behind and has to move right  to avoid riding into me.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: rogerzilla on October 21, 2018, 06:30:40 pm
Unless the peds/dogs are blocking the entire width, I don't ring the bell; it's more likely to cause them to step into my path.

Shared-use paths are an abomination and all three of my crashes in the last 20 years have been on them: swerving to avoid a dog, black ice or hitting a head-down cyclist who looked up at the last moment and swerved right into.me.

I have gently nudged pedestrians out of the way with a hand before when they've not heard the bell.   Even then, they didn't say a thing or react.  Dope? Spice?
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: djrikki on October 22, 2018, 08:30:03 am
I remember hitting a dog a few months back (it was okay), I am now super weary around dog owners who don't have dogs on leads, "oh he never does that" is not an excuse not to have a dog on a leash.

I can understand the need for dogs to run and run free in big parks and such like, but not in urban surroundings with a mix of users.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Peat on October 22, 2018, 08:34:32 am
The people that brush past the peds at full speed are probably the same ones who go apoplectic when a car only leaves 1.4m gap when passing.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: sojournermike on October 22, 2018, 09:25:33 am
See it all the time I’m afraid. On the other hand a series of people thanked me for slowing and passing considerately the other day, so they are aware.

Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: ian on October 22, 2018, 09:59:13 am
It does make me sad – to be honest, park paths (like canal footpaths) should be places people can meander, walk their dogs etc. without having to dodge cyclists. Part of the fault, of course, is in not providing adequate cycling facilities and sending cyclists along a pedestrian path in the first place, but equally that's no excuse for behaving like a dick. Walking up the Regent's Canal footpath the other weekend was a nightmare, we were getting ding-ding-dinged every few seconds and constantly having to get out of the way of cyclists. Most were courteous, but a good number were going too fast for the conditions, and quite a few didn't even bother with a thank-you. From a pedestrian perspective (and we've slowly cycling along the same section several times), it was hard to come away with a good impression of cyclists (mostly because you always remember the worst ones, but still, it was annoying having to keep steeping out of the way).
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Duckfoot1606 on October 22, 2018, 11:08:53 am
Regarding the use of bells when approaching from behind, I’ve been berated for using it and also (on other occasions) when I haven’t so there’s no pleasing some people. As for whizzing by at speed, it’s really just asking for grief imho, there’s plenty of space out there for us all if we apply common sense, which in some cases is distressingly uncommon

A
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: ian on October 22, 2018, 11:14:45 am
Honestly, I hate being dinged out of the way when I'm walking. I always say 'excuse me.' I suspect that if you're going to fast to hold a conversation, you're going too fast. On wider paths, just go around and leave plenty of space, there's no need to keep dinging to 'let people know you are there' – you'll just panic them into jumping in your way.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 22, 2018, 11:32:11 am
Presumably experienced shared-use-path-using pedestrians have learned that the way to cope with cyclists is to hold your line and be predictable, and let the cyclist deal with not hitting you.  I assume they get used to close passes from cyclists the way we do from drivers.

It's the twitchy ones who are the problem, anyway.  The ones who leap into your path when they hear your bell (so you need to ring from far enough back to account for this, which means they don't hear it), or the dog owners with less sense than their dogs.

Shared-use only works when the user density is low enough that you can pass wide without the other path user having to do anything.  That means road-sized paths in parks or pedestrianised areas, or very lightly used towpaths.  It's why they're completely non-scalable as transport infrastructure.


IME the worst close passes are from cyclists on non-shared-use footways.  Presumably because that's the only way to get anywhere when cycling on a busy pavement.  I expect they're the same ones who pass too close in shared-use areas.  Thankfully, they almost never oil their chains, so you can often hear them coming.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 22, 2018, 12:01:41 pm
The closest pass I've had in years was about a month ago while walking across the shared path of the Avonmouth Bridge. It came from behind, it was close enough to whisk the hairs on my arm, and it was from a mopedist. I hadn't heard the moped whine due to the motorway tyre noise. Incidentally, that path is a good demonstration in the noise deflecting properties of different barrier types: at each end it has solid metal armco-structure from ground level to about a metre or so, which provides a relatively quiet environment to lure you on to the path, but in the middle it becomes just a couple of rails and is deafening.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: mattc on October 22, 2018, 02:03:59 pm
Honestly, I hate being dinged out of the way when I'm walking. I always say 'excuse me.'

You (and the cyclists) would probably have a more harmonious time if you interpreted

"ding" == "excuse me"


It sounds like you choose it to mean "get out of my fucking way" - this probably isn't the intention! And if it is, why stress over it? Just assume the polite meaning, and everyone's happy :)

Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: FifeingEejit on October 22, 2018, 02:42:07 pm
Honestly, I hate being dinged out of the way when I'm walking. I always say 'excuse me.'

You (and the cyclists) would probably have a more harmonious time if you interpreted

"ding" == "excuse me"


It sounds like you choose it to mean "get out of my fucking way" - this probably isn't the intention! And if it is, why stress over it? Just assume the polite meaning, and everyone's happy :)


Noise - Response
"Ding" -  "How Impolire how about excuse me"
"Excuse me please" - "Where's your bell"

Cannae win.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: mattc on October 22, 2018, 02:44:21 pm
Very true, Mr Eejit!

(And you're not the first to observe this.)

Clearly it crosses internal UK borders.  ::-)
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Tigerrr on October 22, 2018, 03:04:29 pm
The problem with shared use is that it is human nature for the faster to assume their journey is more important than the slower. As with traffic. The pedestrians are 'impeding' from the perspective of the cyclist trying to go after.Once others are seen as impeding then behaviour goes out the window.  It takes no time at all for that to become a nasty entitled sense of purpose in which dinging people out of the way seems entirely normal.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Peter on October 22, 2018, 03:18:58 pm
Some huge assumptions there.  I ride canal paths and dual-use paths all the time.  I never assume my journey is more important than anyone else's.  I ring my bell from some distance back and have only once had anything other than a satisfactory response, though I suspect there'll be one within minutes of writing this!  In my experience, by far the biggest culprits on such paths are e-bikes and 29-ers who don't use bells or give any warning that they are behind you.  Peds are less of a problem because, although they often walk straight down the middle, if they don't react to your bell, they've got headphones in and ringing the bell far enough back gives you the time to decide whether you can get past just giving them a satisfying shock, or whether a mild shoulder charge is appropriate!

Peter
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: ian on October 22, 2018, 03:38:04 pm
Well, the problem is that most serial bell-ringers are the ones who want you out of their way because their journey is the important one, so like many people I've come to associate the ding-ding with those (and I appreciate that many people are simply using their bell as a polite I'm coming through but they're not the ones you remember). I confess, when someone rides up behind and dings the bell, I bristle. When you're strolling up a narrow path like a towpath, forever having to let cyclists through becomes an annoying dance of ding-ding-move-ding-ding-move. Having them wing past in a park is annoying too. I don't, as a pedestrian, know what your bell is telling me to do. Racing through parks is just plain stupid. Cross the path through Hyde Park on my way to the Serpentine the other day, I had to step back because some lycra'd up bloke was giving it all cylinders (doubly moronic as there's an actual segregated path parallel to it, and the road next to it was closed anyway, so hectares of fresh tarmac he could have gone as fast as he wanted on).

Tigerrr has it. Like drivers, cyclists make the same assumptions that people should make way for them. In reality, it doesn't really affect our journey as cyclists to slow down say 'excuse me' and 'thank you' and maybe a splendidly British 'lovely weather' etc. It'll be nicer interaction all round and yes, you may arrive at your destination a few minutes than you would have, but I think the world will continue to spin.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 22, 2018, 03:46:20 pm
Well, the problem is that most serial bell-ringers are the ones who want you out of their way because their journey is the important one, so like many people I've come to associate the ding-ding with those (and I appreciate that many people are simply using their bell as a polite I'm coming through but they're not the ones you remember). I confess, when someone rides up behind and dings the bell, I bristle. When you're strolling up a narrow path like a towpath, forever having to let cyclists through becomes an annoying dance of ding-ding-move-ding-ding-move. Having them wing past in a park is annoying too. I don't, as a pedestrian, know what your bell is telling me to do. Racing through parks is just plain stupid. Cross the path through Hyde Park on my way to the Serpentine the other day, I had to step back because some lycra'd up bloke was giving it all cylinders (doubly moronic as there's an actual segregated path parallel to it, and the road next to it was closed anyway, so hectares of fresh tarmac he could have gone as fast as he wanted on).

This is why I'm in favour of signs telling cyclists to use their bell.  It means that their use isn't limited to the ping-ping-ping-ping-get-out-of-my-way crowd, so you get less hassle for using them.

I mostly use my bell on blind corners, and from a distance when a group of peds are completely blocking the path.  (This is a lie - I mostly use my bell to accompany a wave to small children gawping at the unusual bike.)  The common pedestrian leap-before-you-look reaction means that there's no point in using them for a continental style "I'm about to overtake you" warning.  If they don't react to the bell from a distance, I prefer to use a mechanical noise (eg. changing gear, flicking brake levers, but definitely not KoolStops) from closer up - that tends to say "bicycle" without startling people as much as a bell.  Speaking's fine, but they tend to assume you're a pedestrian then double-take.


Quote
Tigerrr has it. Like drivers, cyclists make the same assumptions that people should make way for them. In reality, it doesn't really affect our journey as cyclists to slow down say 'excuse me' and 'thank you' and maybe a splendidly British 'lovely weather' etc.

Or, if you want to keep moving, use the road.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: djrikki on October 22, 2018, 03:54:39 pm
When I was in the "mtb club" I used to use my bell very reluctantly, use of a bell to me feels awkward - it doesn't sound very polite in the same way when someone beeps their car horn.  So much easier to say Excuse Me and Thank you.

Whatever the transport everyone knows a bell means "I am here", but when your out for a relaxing walk your often just happy to be away from the evil cars and not having to turn and look wherever you go.

Now that I am in the "road bike" club, as soon as I assembled the bike, Bell, Reflectors all that BS in the bin.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 22, 2018, 04:03:56 pm
TBH, I only have a bell on my tourer because it's a useful sacrificial component to protect the shifter if it falls over.

Even sillier, I've kept the one on my Brompton because it makes a pleasing "Ding!" as the handlebars flop down at the last stage of the fold.

I haven't got one on my mountain bike, in spite of that being the bike I'm most likely to be riding on shared paths.  A mechanical noise or polite "Excuse me." suffices.


I can't help feeling the sound of the bell makes a difference.  Cheapy ping bells sound urgent (unless you only ring them once, in which case they sound like tinnitus).  A deeper bring-bring or ding-dong sounds more cheerful.  A bulb hooter is sufficiently silly that it's hard to take it seriously.  But maybe I'm reading too much into it because I'm a cyclist.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: mattc on October 22, 2018, 04:23:25 pm
Well, the problem is that most serial bell-ringers are the ones who want you out of their way because their journey is the important one, so like many people I've come to associate the ding-ding with those (and I appreciate that many people are simply using their bell as a polite I'm coming through but they're not the ones you remember). I confess, when someone rides up behind and dings the bell, I bristle.
So you're stereotyping - making assumptions about someone you don't even know.


Quote
When you're strolling up a narrow path like a towpath, forever having to let cyclists through becomes an annoying dance of ding-ding-move-ding-ding-move.
but that's just  a problem of overcrowding. You'd still have to do the dance if the same cyclists called out "Excuse me sir!" 
(and anyway, you don't HAVE to leap out of the way - just use appropriate judgement.)


Quote
Having them wing past in a park is annoying too. I don't, as a pedestrian, know what your bell is telling me to do. Racing through parks is just plain stupid. Cross the path through Hyde Park on my way to the Serpentine the other day, I had to step back because some lycra'd up bloke was giving it all cylinders (doubly moronic as there's an actual segregated path parallel to it, and the road next to it was closed anyway, so hectares of fresh tarmac he could have gone as fast as he wanted on).
Well of course there are muppets out there. I suggest a stick in their spokes!
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: quixoticgeek on October 22, 2018, 04:32:03 pm

I have a bell on my bike as it is a legal requirement in some of the countries I cycle in. I occasionally use it, but usually if I feel the need to ring a bell, it's more effective to shout some sort of robust anglo saxon at the moron involved.

On a recent commute through Vondelpark, which is a large wide shared use path (think 10+m wide), with a steady stream of pedestrians, cyclists, skaters, scooters, the occasional bromer, etc... I was cycling along, on the aero bars (because I'm an idiot), and there was a guy on skates doing a slalom like route right across the path, it was a real pain to try and judge and position for where he was. As he went to the right I tried to pass to his left, and he changed direction to go straight across my front. I slammed on the anchors as fast as I could given the position change, and told him something along the lines of "I say old chap, would one consider perhaps the benefits of straight lines", or words to that effect, and even tho the only reason he wasn't splatted across the road alongside me was because of my fast reactions, he seemed oblivious to it. I wonder if one of those who cycles a poorly maintained bike, with shit brakes, and does so with no hands, will eventually smack into him.

The other one that is very common in the same park on the return leg at night, are dog walkers who make a point of covering their pup in lights, make sure they have lights on their arms/body. But nothing on the 10m long black garrote that is invisibly connecting the bundle of claws and teeth at one end, and the grumpy human at the other. Esp when they let said bundle of teeth and claws range to the opposite side of the very busy shared use path...

In general tho the locals are pretty good at handling close passes. The tourists however...

J
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: ian on October 22, 2018, 04:38:42 pm
Well, of course, I'm making an assumption. I don't have psychic powers. But I'm evidently not the only person that perceives a bell ring in such a way. As for the ding-ding-move dance, it's not so much a case of having to move, the ding says 'get out of my way.' Particularly as quite often they then zoom through with nary a thank-you.

There's probably something cultural too. I find car horns aggressive in the UK. Whereas in NYC, for instance, beeping just is, you don't get het up if someone leans on the horn, mostly because everyone is doing it.

The problem with the use-the-road alternative is, of course, that the roads and shit and unpleasant places to cycle. I'd certainly much rather cycle away from traffic.

No offence, but really, yelling at people to get out of the way? How does that benefit anyone? It's the same as drivers who hammer the horn at anyone who has the temerity not to have finished crossing when the lights change.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: quixoticgeek on October 22, 2018, 04:47:44 pm
No offence, but really, yelling at people to get out of the way? How does that benefit anyone? It's the same as drivers who hammer the horn at anyone who has the temerity not to have finished crossing when the lights change.

Because bike bells don't work as a 'caution cyclist coming through' type affair here. Either the locals are so normalised to them as to ignore them, or the tourists have absolutely no clue what is going on. Thus shouting a warning tends to be more universal.

One of the worst issues is the floating tram stops, and people getting off the tram, paying attention to their phone, and walking out into the cycle path. If you shout a warning, and slam on the anchors, you can usually just about stop, but if you stop too fast, chances are the locals on bikes behind you will go into the back of you as their brakes aren't as effective...

I'm amazed that I haven't actually knocked a pedestrian over on my way to work, I've bounced off a couple, but none have fallen over.

J
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: CAMRAMan on October 22, 2018, 05:12:02 pm
A long time ago, I went to Cannock Chase to ride the tracks there with a flatmate who didn't ride often. I descended very carefully making sure I slowed as I passed peds, especially those with their backs to me. He just flew by them at full speed - which was pretty fast, as the descents are steep - without a care for their safety and not knowing if they were aware he was approaching. When I said he should be more considerate, he thought I was being too cautious. I never rode with him after that.

I think the paths there are separated now so MTB riders have their own paths and that's no bad thing.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: mattc on October 22, 2018, 05:18:11 pm
Well, of course, I'm making an assumption. I don't have psychic powers. But I'm evidently not the only person that perceives a bell ring in such a way. As for the ding-ding-move dance, it's not so much a case of having to move, the ding says 'get out of my way.'

You MUST have psychic powers - you are quite certain of what people mean when they ring their bell! And the other people with psychic powers back you up  :thumbsup:

The thing is, a bell isn't like the human voice. You ding it, or you don't ding it. There is no inflection, no aggresive tone, no impatience - with most you can't even control the volume. It's just a ding -  beyond that you hear what you choose to hear!

Clearly we've gone full circle here and will have to agree-to-disagree.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: sojournermike on October 22, 2018, 05:49:40 pm
I have to admit I don't have a bell and prefer a cheery 'hello' to let people know I'm there. I also slow to pass when there's no room for a wide berth. Apart from anything else, I don't want to get pushed off...

QG, I'm not sure that blaming the skateboarder for skating in curves really works - it sounds as though you had time to see how he was rolling and perhaps could have anticipated him coming back across you?

I had an odd situation with a couple of chaps riding home on mtb's a few weeks ago. I was approaching from behind and they turned left down the road I was also turning left down. I went wide and started to pass them as they decided to wander across the road towards the backstreet on the right. We avoided contact and a few apologies all around and went our ways happy enough.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: quixoticgeek on October 22, 2018, 06:08:04 pm

QG, I'm not sure that blaming the skateboarder for skating in curves really works - it sounds as though you had time to see how he was rolling and perhaps could have anticipated him coming back across you?

Inline skater. You have to question if it is responsible to slalom across one of the main thoroughfare's of a city, at Rush hour. It's just bellendery.

J
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Baron Brymbo von Pickelhaube on October 22, 2018, 06:09:39 pm
Funny this should come up.  Baronin von P. and I visited Bath this weekend, staying in Monkton Combe. 

On Saturday we walked the Bath Two Tunnels circuit anti-clockwise into Bath.  It was pleasant and the cyclists were mostly well-behaved and some gave warning of approach by bell or call.  There were quite a few what appeared to be occasional leisure cyclists (maybe hirers) and you had to be aware of these because they did not appear to be completely in control of their vehicles.

On Sunday we walked the circuit clockwise into Bath, actually through the tunnels.  It was unpleasant due to the cyclists and there were several close passes, most unannounced, and some very fast for the conditions.  These close passes even occurred when we walked one behind the other and not side-by-side.

There were a couple of exemplary riders, and you've guessed it, they fitted the audax/cycle tourist/CTC stereotype and not the lycra-lout racers who appear to have confused the sustrans route with Hillingdon.  Also, our anti-clockwise route was mostly toepath and clockwise there was a lot more of what appeared to be former railway.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 22, 2018, 06:13:27 pm
I note that audax/cycle tourist/CTC stereotype-conforming cyclists will be easily detected as they approach in tunnels, because they're the ones who have lights.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Jurek on October 22, 2018, 06:25:05 pm
I'm a shouter.
Sometimes its 'Excuse me please', sometimes it is 'Ding! Ding!'

The key to shouting is getting the volume / distance right.
Too far away, and they won't hear you.
Too close, and they will, like horses, be spooked - And bellowing is seldom well received.
If their ears are full of Sennheiser (other makes of headphone are available) you are onto a loser anyway.

Bell ringing?
Best left to the campanologists - otherwise it is just I'm entitled rudeness.

Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: perpetual dan on October 22, 2018, 06:51:07 pm
I tend to use a spot of freewheel, which about half of people hear; then an "excuse me" or "on your right" and leave bell tinging to the unresponsive folk that are walking down the middle of the path (those two seem to correlate). Mostly because bell tinging is a bit "beep beep" ish while talking is a bit more personal. Then again, my shared use path cycling isn't so long that my need for speed is great so I'm not yelling at anyone, and I see many of the same people again so a degree of being polite is needed.  O:-)
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 22, 2018, 07:31:13 pm
I was once witness to a very near head on collision followed by a very near pile up in the Staple Hill tunnel between Bristol and Bath when a bunch of fastish cyclists (I can't remember now if it was a CTC ride or a club event) moved to overtake a couple of slower cyclists having totally misjudged the speed and distance of an oncoming cyclist due to their extremely bright front light.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 22, 2018, 07:36:57 pm
I can't help feeling the sound of the bell makes a difference.  Cheapy ping bells sound urgent (unless you only ring them once, in which case they sound like tinnitus).  A deeper bring-bring or ding-dong sounds more cheerful.  A bulb hooter is sufficiently silly that it's hard to take it seriously.  But maybe I'm reading too much into it because I'm a cyclist.
I can't remember now whether it was ChrisN, iddu, Sam or possibly Rogerzilla who remarked on Saturday that my bell (a Lion Bell) sounds like a receptionist's desk. "Dingggggggg!" "Fawlty Towers, how may I help you?"
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Peter on October 22, 2018, 07:47:21 pm
I'm really quite upset by Ian's attitude.  I normally really enjoy his posts.  Of course he is presumptious and stereotyping!  I ring my bell to let people know there is a cyclist coming, so that they are not shocked, or suddenly veer sideways.  They very rarely even need to move off the line they are already on - I'm just letting them know I'm coming and I am totally unaggressive.  However, Ian, if you want to come and walk up near Rochdale, please put a target on your back so I know it's you.  There'll be no bell - and no bloody lifebelt, either!
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: ian on October 22, 2018, 08:02:58 pm
Sorry, but you write that with the perspective of a cyclist, not a pedestrian. They don't know the meaning of your bell ring or whether you are considerate or a speed-racer that wants me out of the way. Sadly, all it takes is a few instances of the latter and, well, that's why people have a bad impression of cyclists. I appreciate that isn't you. It isn't me either. But it is, alas, how people interpret these things. Most drivers who give you a close pass will claim they 'gave you plenty of room' – chances are, many of them think they did, but the perspective of the cyclist in the circumstance is very different than that from the enclosed comfort of a driving seat.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Peter on October 22, 2018, 08:26:47 pm
Sure, Ian.  Plenty of cyclists piss me off, too.  They are the ones I remember.  Plenty of headphone-wearing and/or dog-wielding peds. piss me off, too - but loads don't.  I was only joking about the canal - I have my life-saving badges, so you'll be fine! 

I think it might help on a dual-use path (the Rochdale Canal is part of one of the longest NCN routes in the country - NCN 66) if both types of user used the paths as if they knew the other type of user existed and also had rights.  I know as a pedestrian or cyclist I don't like to be surprised by a cyclist, though I can cope with having to negotiate a ped who thoughtlessly, though probably not deliberately, walks in such a way as to block all progress to anyone else in either direction.

peter
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 22, 2018, 09:57:10 pm
What would help would be if all users would stick to a consistent side of the path.  Doesn't work on towpaths, though, as everyone wants to avoid the water, except when cyclists are busy avoiding chutney or overhanging branches, or when dogs are being emptied.

I think the only way to reasonably enforce that behaviour is with segregated pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure, and sufficient volume of cycle traffic to discourage the pedestrians from wandering in the cycle lane.  And if there were room for that, it probably wouldn't be a shared-use path in the first place.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: MikeFromLFE on October 23, 2018, 09:01:38 am
I cycle a fair bit on my local towpath as part of my volunteering with The Canal & River Trust, it also means I get to see what's going on too. By and large the interaction between cyclists and pedestrians works well. Where conflict occurs is in the bridge holes - too many riders ding their bell, in a 'get out of the way' fashion and then speed into the holes which are also a blind corner, where there is nowhere for a ped to actually go, except into the water. There is no difference between the type of rider who does this - I've seen family pootlers, and tourists do it. It's all very odd.

My most recent issue, which was completely atypical, and happened when I was not in my volunteer uniform (or I would have said strong words) was when I was cycling along a narrow bit of towpath, with a lock some 50 yards ahead. I was slowly following a 'slow jogger', waiting to pass her at the lock, when, you guessed it - ding ding, ding ding! I suspect that if I hadn't been there, the dinger would have forced the jogger into the swamp on the right, or the water on the left.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 23, 2018, 09:04:20 am
Shared-use paths with a line down the middle and one side for bikes, the other for walkers, are useless. To work they'd have to be about four bikes wide – or two bikes and two pedestrians, which is much the same thing (in fact pedestrians can be wider than bikes bearing in mind things they push and carry). In practice the wide ones are maybe just about wide enough for three bikes, usually only two.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Jaded on October 23, 2018, 09:27:05 am
Our local shared path is largely incompetent as a path. I’ve tried bells and ‘ding ding’ but what works best is ‘hi there, cyclist’.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: FifeingEejit on October 23, 2018, 01:56:58 pm
I've found that the Hope freehub is the most useful device for pedestrian awareness.
The racket it makes can be heard far enough away that a pedestrian looks round wondering "hat the f--- is that" and also be far enough away to not imply a hurried need to get past; in other words they hear you a mile away and know you're there far enough in advance that all you need is a "Hi" or "Good morning" as you pass.

Having a coughing fit is another (unintentional) tactic that I've found often works but is sometimes misconstrued as a "get out the way"

Absolutely nothing works on the Tay Road bridge though as audibility is diabolic due to either traffic noise from the main carriageway or from the howling wind, usually both.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 23, 2018, 02:35:03 pm
One of the worst issues is the floating tram stops, and people getting off the tram, paying attention to their phone, and walking out into the cycle path. If you shout a warning, and slam on the anchors, you can usually just about stop, but if you stop too fast, chances are the locals on bikes behind you will go into the back of you as their brakes aren't as effective...
Interesting that you find them such a bad situation, given they're one of the favourite bits of infrastructure that all the "go Dutch" type campaigns here in the UK are asking for, and a few have been installed now. Is bouncing off pedestrians worth it to avoid getting stuck between bus and kerb or between bus and car? Or are there other benefits in NL than those claimed here? (Or does the average omafooter just ride somewhat slower than you and have more time to slalom the peds?)
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 23, 2018, 05:34:49 pm
Isn't the general point that by making cycle infra that's good enough that people actually use bikes, you turn car-vs-ped collisions into cycle-vs-ped collisions.  I know what I prefer to be hit by.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: mattc on October 23, 2018, 07:06:38 pm
Isn't the general point that by making cycle infra that's good enough that people actually use bikes, you turn car-vs-ped collisions into cycle-vs-ped collisions.  I know what I prefer to be hit by.
Is this about the floating-tram-thingies? Either way, it's a good point that seems to get forgotten by ranty drivers-who-occasionally-walk-somewhere. :(
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 23, 2018, 07:16:54 pm
Yeah, floating bus/tram stops are one feature of cycle infra that's designed to make cycling good enough that people actually want to use it.  Much better to cycle behind the stop, slowing down in case of lemmings, than to have to wait behind the bus or ride through the gathered bus queue.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: hondated on October 23, 2018, 09:46:39 pm
I'm a shouter.
Sometimes its 'Excuse me please', sometimes it is 'Ding! Ding!'

The key to shouting is getting the volume / distance right.
Too far away, and they won't hear you.
Too close, and they will, like horses, be spooked - And bellowing is seldom well received.
If their ears are full of Sennheiser (other makes of headphone are available) you are onto a loser anyway.

Bell ringing?
Best left to the campanologists - otherwise it is just I'm entitled rudeness.
I,m a shouter too and do  it as politely as I can but...
Sometime ago now I was cycling along the cookoo trail East Sussex and had passed several people using this method without any problems. Until I met a belligerent old man, well one about my age walking his dog. After telling him I was about to pass he didnt attempt to move out of my way but thankfully there was enough space to pass anyway and has I did he shouted" get a bell ". Now given he never had his dog on a leash I responded by telling him to get his dog under control. His response was to call me the C word. Which immediately caused me to brake and remonstrate with him. Long story short each time I decided to just ride away from him he uttered the C word to me. Which of cause stopped me in my tracks again.
Finally knowing that it would be stupid to get into a fight with him I took my phone out and took a photo of him. He of cause didnt like me doing that and told me as much as well. To which I replied tough I have taken it. Thankfully he did not reply and I rode off with a smile on my face knowing he will always wonder what I did with the photo. Nothing yet !
So after this incident I thought about fitting a bell but given this was the only person I have ever had a problem with when it comes to riding past I have not bothered. Hopefully he now keeps his mouth shut when cyclists pass him.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 23, 2018, 10:00:40 pm
I've very occasionally had people say I should use a bell after using my bell.  Which just goes to demonstrate the futility of it.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: quixoticgeek on October 23, 2018, 10:24:29 pm
Interesting that you find them such a bad situation, given they're one of the favourite bits of infrastructure that all the "go Dutch" type campaigns here in the UK are asking for, and a few have been installed now. Is bouncing off pedestrians worth it to avoid getting stuck between bus and kerb or between bus and car? Or are there other benefits in NL than those claimed here? (Or does the average omafooter just ride somewhat slower than you and have more time to slalom the peds?)

No. There is nothing inherently wrong with floating tram stops. There is an issue with tourists who are not familiar with the road layouts of a foreign country failing to keep an adequate level of awareness. The people that are stepping out into the fietspad are invariably not locals.

J



Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 23, 2018, 10:46:05 pm
Interesting that you find them such a bad situation, given they're one of the favourite bits of infrastructure that all the "go Dutch" type campaigns here in the UK are asking for, and a few have been installed now. Is bouncing off pedestrians worth it to avoid getting stuck between bus and kerb or between bus and car? Or are there other benefits in NL than those claimed here? (Or does the average omafooter just ride somewhat slower than you and have more time to slalom the peds?)

No. There is nothing inherently wrong with floating tram stops. There is an issue with tourists who are not familiar with the road layouts of a foreign country failing to keep an adequate level of awareness. The people that are stepping out into the fietspad are invariably not locals.

J
The ones who step out on to it here are locals! But even where they're not, that does suggest a failure of design, in that it's not obvious to all users what they're expected to do. And probably, at least in the British implementation, insufficient space for people waiting for the bus.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: DuncanM on October 23, 2018, 11:01:18 pm
I rode part of the Camel Trail on Monday, with two 9yos and a 10yo. "Interesting" would probably cover it (herding cats likewise!). :)
Most cyclists and pedestrians were well behaved, though there were quite a few other kids, and kids make sticking on one side of the path somewhat complex. The only bell I heard was from my daughter (9). It seems a bit insistent to me, but when people look around and discover it's a kid they tend to smile. The only person I heard a complaint about was a lycra clad cyclist going much faster than the others.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Peter on October 24, 2018, 12:08:23 am
On what I hope is a light-hearted note, I mentioned in an early post that I had only ever had one adverse reaction to using a bell (which I do from a reasonable distance).  That was a bloke, slightly worse for wear (common on canal banks near Manchester, which is why so many of them drown - that's not the light-hearted note, by the way) who said, as I passed, "You're the first fucking cyclist I've ever heard use a fucking bell!" which was an awful lot of words for someone in his state.  Excellent effort.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: tonycollinet on October 24, 2018, 06:26:16 am
If you are close enough to say "excuse me" you are too close to use the bell. It is not one or the other it is both. Bell from far back so they know you are coming (I have a loud bellworks bell, so that I can use it from further back)

If there is no response to the bell, then excuse me - or "I'm just coming past on the left" when close.

I've never had a negative reaction to the bell, though I do still get occasional startles.

Speaking is usually required for headphone zombies (AND THEN SOMETIMES SHOUTING) or the elderly who don't hear the higher pitches of a bell.

Either way I always slow down almost to around double walking pace - more if there is a loose dog. Unless the ped has stopped and stepped off the path as some do - in which case I go faster to hold them up for less time.

Mostly I get a smile and thanks, and regardless give same in return.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 24, 2018, 08:48:17 am
If there is no response to the bell, then excuse me - or "I'm just coming past on the left" when close.
Good to use a whole sentence like that, I reckon. If you reduce it to "On the left!" it's not clear, to those who aren't familiar with the phrase (ie most people) whether it means "There's something on your left" or "I'm coming past on your left" or "You should move left". And, just like "Car up/down" it's not even used with totally consistent meaning among cyclists.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: bobb on October 24, 2018, 09:06:55 am
The National Dog Walkers Route 1 runs through my home town. If I'm on a bike with a bell, peds jump out of their skin when I ping it. If I'm on a bike without a bell and call out, they jump out of their skin. If I'm on my MTB and just avoid them completely by going on the grass, they jump..... You get the picture....
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: fboab on October 24, 2018, 09:43:40 am
Is being nice so difficult?
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: ian on October 24, 2018, 10:23:09 am
I've had these levers attached to my handlebars. They're a pretty cool innovation. You pull them and the bike slows down. It amazing. Previously I'd have to yell GET OUT OF MY WAY! or go all campanological on their path-idling asses. Now I slow down and wish them a nice day, smile tolerantly at their meanderings kids and wayward dogs as they eventually step to one side, and let me get on my way. It's a whole new world, I tell you. All that previous shouting ARE YOU FUCKING DEAF? (and sometimes they were!) was making me rather hoarse. Rather than yell at tourists for not being au fait with the detail of our country, I can tell them the Queen lives over there and she makes tea for every visitor.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: bobb on October 24, 2018, 11:09:12 am
Is being nice so difficult?

Yes. Yes it is you fucking dick.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: tonycollinet on October 24, 2018, 12:31:14 pm
Now there is a post that seriously needs an emoticon (I Hope)
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: bobb on October 24, 2018, 12:43:40 pm
I'll put some in for those in any doubt  :P :P :P :P ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: mattc on October 24, 2018, 02:40:48 pm
Just in case one's single polite "Ding!" is misinterpreted by pedestrians as insistent, impatient, or even meaning "Get out of my way!" I too have adopted a more sociable approach.

First a gentle "Excuse me" as I creep up alongside them.
Then more of an introduction. Perhaps "Good day - how are you?"
Then I try to engage them in more varied topics, such as the purpose of their journey, or the state of the surface which we are sharing, or the latest score achieved by our local sportsball team.

Unfortunately this is usually met with a stern, straight-ahead stare. or quite often
"Leave me alone, you fucking weirdo!"
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: De Sisti on October 24, 2018, 03:34:12 pm
Just slow down to walking pace as you approach and pass the pedestrians.

Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: fboab on October 24, 2018, 03:57:45 pm
Is being nice so difficult?

Yes. Yes it is you fucking dick.

 ;D
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: quixoticgeek on October 24, 2018, 09:23:44 pm
The ones who step out on to it here are locals! But even where they're not, that does suggest a failure of design, in that it's not obvious to all users what they're expected to do. And probably, at least in the British implementation, insufficient space for people waiting for the bus.

The concept of floating bus/tram stop is not inherently flawed. There are however implementation issues. If you compare this bus stop (in the UK I think)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DqR8nxaWsAEFvl4.jpg)

With this tram stop in Amsterdam (the one on the far side of the road to the camera).

(http://photos.quixotic.eu/misc/floatingtramstop.png)

In the former case there is a fence, so getting off the bus you have to change direction to cross the cycle lane. Where as in this Dutch case, the tourists get off the tram, only a paved "platform" that is about 1-1.5m wide, and go straight across into the fietspad. Sticking a fence here to direct the pedestrians would be an potential solution. I ride this every day so I know to look for for the tram coming to a stop and try to read the crowd, tho not being a local, I had to learn this.

J
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Peter on October 25, 2018, 01:27:38 am
Do you have to share the cycle way with motor scooters?
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Ham on October 25, 2018, 07:58:05 am
The fence is unusual in the new cycle-soup-highways with this  (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5369396,-0.0035036,2a,75y,265.93h,91.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sc8rtkqz_mkPa09nX55MhHA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)being more common, with and without shelter. With shelter adds a danger point at the far end of the shelter, where vision is restricted and the path changes angle. Answer is to slow down.

Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: quixoticgeek on October 25, 2018, 08:44:19 am
Do you have to share the cycle way with motor scooters?

Amsterdam recently changed the rules so that brommers have to use the main traffic lane, not the fietspad. But for the rest of .nl, Brommers, Brommobile, kick scooters, mobility scooters, bakfiets, etc... All in the fietspad.

J
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 25, 2018, 09:43:49 am
We've got one with a fence in Bristol, although I think it was an addition after they built it.
https://goo.gl/maps/vgTN29f5kxp

It's also got a not-zebra crossing, as you see. I rarely ride along there so can't really say how well that particular one works, but I do feel it would be better with a wider pavement for bus passengers to wait on. The more general problem though is pedestrians simply walking or standing in the cycleway, not specifically at bus stops.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Peter on October 25, 2018, 12:57:58 pm
That latter is certainly the case near Manchester University.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: De Sisti on October 25, 2018, 01:53:40 pm
The ones who step out on to it here are locals! But even where they're not, that does suggest a failure of design, in that it's not obvious to all users what they're expected to do. And probably, at least in the British implementation, insufficient space for people waiting for the bus.

The concept of floating bus/tram stop is not inherently flawed. There are however implementation issues. If you compare this bus stop (in the UK I think)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DqR8nxaWsAEFvl4.jpg)

With this tram stop in Amsterdam (the one on the far side of the road to the camera).

(http://photos.quixotic.eu/misc/floatingtramstop.png)

In the former case there is a fence, so getting off the bus you have to change direction to cross the cycle lane. Where as in this Dutch case, the tourists get off the tram, only a paved "platform" that is about 1-1.5m wide, and go straight across into the fietspad. Sticking a fence here to direct the pedestrians would be an potential solution. I ride this every day so I know to look for for the tram coming to a stop and try to read the crowd, tho not being a local, I had to learn this.

J
Can't see an Amsterdam one.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: quixoticgeek on October 25, 2018, 03:17:59 pm
Can't see an Amsterdam one.

As in the picture doesn't load, or you can't see in the picture what the floating tram stop is?

J
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 25, 2018, 03:22:17 pm
I don't know what De Sisti is seeing, but I see the image and the image itself isn't much help in showing us a floating tram stop. I can see the shelter but it's on the far side of the road and in the shade of trees. It would help if you gave us a link to the google streetview itself rather than a screenshot, I think.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: quixoticgeek on October 25, 2018, 03:23:47 pm
I don't know what De Sisti is seeing, but I see the image and the image itself isn't much help in showing us a floating tram stop. I can see the shelter but it's on the far side of the road and in the shade of trees. It would help if you gave us a link to the google streetview itself rather than a screenshot, I think.

https://goo.gl/maps/dvmRdnN7vxJ2

J
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 25, 2018, 03:45:44 pm
Thanks. The big difference I see (now!) between the Amsterdam and British designs is that in Amsterdam, the bike path goes between the stop and the road – or rather, the tracks – whereas in Britain, it always (as far as I've seen) goes behind the stop. So in NL you have to cross the bike lane to get between tram and stop, whereas in GB you have to cross the bikes to get between bus stop and pavement. That is, the UK design would appear to allow the shelter to function as a sort of 'vestibule' between modes of transport (bus and foot). There's also the point that the NL bike path is a straight line, incentivising fast riding! OTOH there appears to be better differentiation between pavement and cyclepath in NL.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: ian on October 25, 2018, 03:53:22 pm
...
Answer is to slow down.

The best advice in this topic.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: De Sisti on October 25, 2018, 03:56:31 pm
Can't see an Amsterdam one.

As in the picture doesn't load, or you can't see in the picture what the floating tram stop is?

J
The Amsterdam picture doesn't load up (but thanks for the link).
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: quixoticgeek on October 25, 2018, 03:57:46 pm
Thanks. The big difference I see (now!) between the Amsterdam and British designs is that in Amsterdam, the bike path goes between the stop and the road – or rather, the tracks – whereas in Britain, it always (as far as I've seen) goes behind the stop. So in NL you have to cross the bike lane to get between tram and stop, whereas in GB you have to cross the bikes to get between bus stop and pavement. That is, the UK design would appear to allow the shelter to function as a sort of 'vestibule' between modes of transport (bus and foot). There's also the point that the NL bike path is a straight line, incentivising fast riding! OTOH there appears to be better differentiation between pavement and cyclepath in NL.

Aye. This is not a reference design not all floating stops in .nl follow the same pattern, if you look the one on the near side of the picture has the tram shelter on the platform for example. But yes, it is a flawed design in this instance IMHO.

Something makes me think there is little incentive for Gemente Amsterdam, or GVB to fix it.

Interestingly, since this street view car has gone down there. The road where the street view car is, has been made into a fietsstraat. Which means they paint it red, and put a couple of bits of paint saying motor vehicles are guests on this bit of road. The idea is a good one, as at rush hour in the evening, the volume of cyclists on this stretch is insane, and in about 200m turnwise along the road, you hit Leidseplien which is closed to private motorvehicles. What they haven't fixed is the annoying sod who parks their electric car about 100m turnwise from the position linked above, and does so with the charging connector sticking out into the fietspad, but I've ranted elsewhere about the poor design of EV charging connectors...

J
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: De Sisti on October 25, 2018, 03:59:36 pm
...
Answer is to slow down.

The best advice in this topic.
That's true. But impaitient people on bikes (just like their counterparts in motorised vehicles)
always want to be moving 'at speed' and not wanting anything to slow their progress.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 25, 2018, 03:59:55 pm
Thanks. The big difference I see (now!) between the Amsterdam and British designs is that in Amsterdam, the bike path goes between the stop and the road – or rather, the tracks – whereas in Britain, it always (as far as I've seen) goes behind the stop. So in NL you have to cross the bike lane to get between tram and stop, whereas in GB you have to cross the bikes to get between bus stop and pavement. That is, the UK design would appear to allow the shelter to function as a sort of 'vestibule' between modes of transport (bus and foot). There's also the point that the NL bike path is a straight line, incentivising fast riding! OTOH there appears to be better differentiation between pavement and cyclepath in NL.

Hang on, surely only the British design qualifies as 'floating'?

The Amsterdam example is just a tram shelter out of the way at the back of the footway, much as a British bus shelter usually is - the difference being that the tram is on rails (and blocked by a kerb) so it can't just pull in and block the cycle lane to stop as British buses normally do.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 25, 2018, 04:00:45 pm
...
Answer is to slow down.

The best advice in this topic.
That's true. But impaitient people on bikes (just like their counterparts in motorised vehicles)
always want to be moving 'at speed' and not wanting anything to slow their progress.

More relevantly, slowing down doesn't actually do much to prevent pedestrians startling (and potentially leaping into your path, or shouting at you for using/not using a bell) when they realise you're there.  It just trades stability of your bike for more time to react, and reduces the severity of any resultant collision.

Slowing down is entirely reasonable, but isn't a complete answer.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 25, 2018, 04:06:03 pm
Thanks. The big difference I see (now!) between the Amsterdam and British designs is that in Amsterdam, the bike path goes between the stop and the road – or rather, the tracks – whereas in Britain, it always (as far as I've seen) goes behind the stop. So in NL you have to cross the bike lane to get between tram and stop, whereas in GB you have to cross the bikes to get between bus stop and pavement. That is, the UK design would appear to allow the shelter to function as a sort of 'vestibule' between modes of transport (bus and foot). There's also the point that the NL bike path is a straight line, incentivising fast riding! OTOH there appears to be better differentiation between pavement and cyclepath in NL.

Aye. This is not a reference design not all floating stops in .nl follow the same pattern, if you look the one on the near side of the picture has the tram shelter on the platform for example. But yes, it is a flawed design in this instance IMHO.

Something makes me think there is little incentive for Gemente Amsterdam, or GVB to fix it.

Interestingly, since this street view car has gone down there. The road where the street view car is, has been made into a fietsstraat. Which means they paint it red, and put a couple of bits of paint saying motor vehicles are guests on this bit of road. The idea is a good one, as at rush hour in the evening, the volume of cyclists on this stretch is insane, and in about 200m turnwise along the road, you hit Leidseplien which is closed to private motorvehicles. What they haven't fixed is the annoying sod who parks their electric car about 100m turnwise from the position linked above, and does so with the charging connector sticking out into the fietspad, but I've ranted elsewhere about the poor design of EV charging connectors...

J
What does "turnwise" mean?  ???
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 25, 2018, 04:07:22 pm
What does "turnwise" mean?  ???

Opposite of 'widdershins'.  Discworld equivalent of 'east' and 'west', which IIRC is being used as a sort of more logical polar coordinate system for directions in Amsterdam.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 25, 2018, 04:07:58 pm
Thanks. The big difference I see (now!) between the Amsterdam and British designs is that in Amsterdam, the bike path goes between the stop and the road – or rather, the tracks – whereas in Britain, it always (as far as I've seen) goes behind the stop. So in NL you have to cross the bike lane to get between tram and stop, whereas in GB you have to cross the bikes to get between bus stop and pavement. That is, the UK design would appear to allow the shelter to function as a sort of 'vestibule' between modes of transport (bus and foot). There's also the point that the NL bike path is a straight line, incentivising fast riding! OTOH there appears to be better differentiation between pavement and cyclepath in NL.

Hang on, surely only the British design qualifies as 'floating'?

The Amsterdam example is just a tram shelter out of the way at the back of the footway, much as a British bus shelter usually is - the difference being that the tram is on rails (and blocked by a kerb) so it can't just pull in and block the cycle lane to stop as British buses normally do.
That was my thought too, but I guess I'm not 100% certain of the definition, if there is one, of a floating stop.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 25, 2018, 04:09:25 pm
What does "turnwise" mean?  ???

Opposite of 'widdershins'
So "clockwise". Rather nonintuitive, as things can be turned in either direction – and in this context, it sounded more as if it referred to a turn in the round.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: quixoticgeek on October 25, 2018, 04:10:56 pm
What does "turnwise" mean?  ???

Unhelpful answer: opposite of widdershins...

More helpful answer: Amsterdam is shaped like a spiders web or a ship's wheel. Because most of the roads going round the city follow the curves of the canals, directions like north, east, south, & west, can get very confusing. So, blatantly stealing from the disk world, a number geekier residents have started using directions based on hubwards (towards central station), rimwards (opposite direction out towards the ring road), turnwise (clockwise), and widdershins (anti-clockwise). This results in directions from one bar to another something like "Follow that canal 3 bridges turnwise, then go out one canal rimwards"

J

Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 25, 2018, 04:12:31 pm
...
Answer is to slow down.

The best advice in this topic.
That's true. But impaitient people on bikes (just like their counterparts in motorised vehicles)
always want to be moving 'at speed' and not wanting anything to slow their progress.

More relevantly, slowing down doesn't actually do much to prevent pedestrians startling (and potentially leaping into your path, or shouting at you for using/not using a bell) when they realise you're there.  It just trades stability of your bike for more time to react, and reduces the severity of any resultant collision.

Slowing down is entirely reasonable, but isn't a complete answer.
Stability? Maybe recumbents are less stable at low speed, but most bikes are stable at walking speed for a short distance. And more to the point, the cyclists most likely to riding at speeds where speed itself is a factor in causing a collision are probably going 20mph+ (whether for fun, strava segments or simply not being late).
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 25, 2018, 04:14:36 pm
What does "turnwise" mean?  ???

Unhelpful answer: opposite of widdershins...

More helpful answer: Amsterdam is shaped like a spiders web or a ship's wheel. Because most of the roads going round the city follow the curves of the canals, directions like north, east, south, & west, can get very confusing. So, blatantly stealing from the disk world, a number geekier residents have started using directions based on hubwards (towards central station), rimwards (opposite direction out towards the ring road), turnwise (clockwise), and widdershins (anti-clockwise). This results in directions from one bar to another something like "Follow that canal 3 bridges turnwise, then go out one canal rimwards"

J
Oh, so Amsterdam is based on Sczecin!
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: quixoticgeek on October 25, 2018, 04:16:33 pm
What does "turnwise" mean?  ???

Unhelpful answer: opposite of widdershins...

More helpful answer: Amsterdam is shaped like a spiders web or a ship's wheel. Because most of the roads going round the city follow the curves of the canals, directions like north, east, south, & west, can get very confusing. So, blatantly stealing from the disk world, a number geekier residents have started using directions based on hubwards (towards central station), rimwards (opposite direction out towards the ring road), turnwise (clockwise), and widdershins (anti-clockwise). This results in directions from one bar to another something like "Follow that canal 3 bridges turnwise, then go out one canal rimwards"

J
Oh, so Amsterdam is based on Sczecin!
Stability? Maybe recumbents are less stable at low speed, but most bikes are stable at walking speed for a short distance. And more to the point, the cyclists most likely to riding at speeds where speed itself is a factor in causing a collision are probably going 20mph+ (whether for fun, strava segments or simply not being late).

The actual issue you run into with a bike culture where everyone is cycling and maintenance of the bikes is considered optional, slowing down is not always an option, you're in a critical mass of cyclists all moving at the same speed. I've had issues in the past where I slammed on the brakes to stop for a hazard, and it resulted in those behind me crashing in to me. I've even had this where I stopped for a red light, which came as a surprise to those behind me, resulting in a pile up.

Not everyone has good slow speed handling skills, and not everyone has good enough slow speed skills for a group in a confined space. You see this a lot at traffic lights when everyone wobbles around when starting.

J
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 25, 2018, 04:16:55 pm
What does "turnwise" mean?  ???

Opposite of 'widdershins'
So "clockwise". Rather nonintuitive, as things can be turned in either direction – and in this context, it sounded more as if it referred to a turn in the round.

Yeah, but planets (even magical flat ones) generally turn in a consistent direction[1].  News of this may even have reached the BBC graphics department.


[1] Unlike clocks, which should logically[2] go the opposite way in the southern hemisphere (or dark side of the disc).
[2] For values of logic that assume a clock has hands rotating on a face, rather than the time written on it.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 25, 2018, 04:18:50 pm
What does "turnwise" mean?  ???

Opposite of 'widdershins'
So "clockwise". Rather nonintuitive, as things can be turned in either direction – and in this context, it sounded more as if it referred to a turn in the round.

Yeah, but planets (even magical flat ones) generally turn in a consistent direction[1].  News of this may even have reached the BBC graphics department.


[1] Unlike clocks, which should logically[2] go the opposite way in the southern hemisphere (or dark side of the disc).
[2] For values of logic that assume a clock has hands rotating on a face, rather than the time written on it.

Indeed, but the context needs to be established.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 25, 2018, 04:20:40 pm
What does "turnwise" mean?  ???

Unhelpful answer: opposite of widdershins...

More helpful answer: Amsterdam is shaped like a spiders web or a ship's wheel. Because most of the roads going round the city follow the curves of the canals, directions like north, east, south, & west, can get very confusing. So, blatantly stealing from the disk world, a number geekier residents have started using directions based on hubwards (towards central station), rimwards (opposite direction out towards the ring road), turnwise (clockwise), and widdershins (anti-clockwise). This results in directions from one bar to another something like "Follow that canal 3 bridges turnwise, then go out one canal rimwards"

J
Oh, so Amsterdam is based on Sczecin!
Stability? Maybe recumbents are less stable at low speed, but most bikes are stable at walking speed for a short distance. And more to the point, the cyclists most likely to riding at speeds where speed itself is a factor in causing a collision are probably going 20mph+ (whether for fun, strava segments or simply not being late).

The actual issue you run into with a bike culture where everyone is cycling and maintenance of the bikes is considered optional, slowing down is not always an option, you're in a critical mass of cyclists all moving at the same speed. I've had issues in the past where I slammed on the brakes to stop for a hazard, and it resulted in those behind me crashing in to me. I've even had this where I stopped for a red light, which came as a surprise to those behind me, resulting in a pile up.

Not everyone has good slow speed handling skills, and not everyone has good enough slow speed skills for a group in a confined space. You see this a lot at traffic lights when everyone wobbles around when starting.

J
Yeah, I think the issues in a Dutch rush hour and a British daytime (let alone evening) are going to be different.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: SteveC on October 25, 2018, 04:23:32 pm
Consistent direction but which direction that is does depend on where on the planet you are standing. (Assuming an approximately spherical planet)

The non-discworld opposite of widdershins is deosil but that just means sunwise so we’re left with the same problem.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 25, 2018, 04:23:49 pm
...
Answer is to slow down.

The best advice in this topic.
That's true. But impaitient people on bikes (just like their counterparts in motorised vehicles)
always want to be moving 'at speed' and not wanting anything to slow their progress.

More relevantly, slowing down doesn't actually do much to prevent pedestrians startling (and potentially leaping into your path, or shouting at you for using/not using a bell) when they realise you're there.  It just trades stability of your bike for more time to react, and reduces the severity of any resultant collision.

Slowing down is entirely reasonable, but isn't a complete answer.
Stability? Maybe recumbents are less stable at low speed, but most bikes are stable at walking speed for a short distance. And more to the point, the cyclists most likely to riding at speeds where speed itself is a factor in causing a collision are probably going 20mph+ (whether for fun, strava segments or simply not being late).

It's not about the bike (on the assumption that anyone riding a twitchy road bike or low recumbent or whatever probably has the balance skills to compensate).  The average YACFer will be extremely competent at cycling at walking speed.  The average shared-use-path user, much less so.  Particularly in .nl where muggles actually ride bicycles for transport.

I remember crashing into a pedestrian while following behind them at low speed on a bridleway when I was a child (not sure how old, but under 12).  They moved sideways unexpectedly, I grabbed a handful of brakes, and fell off my bike into them.  As an adult, I know to leave more room and expect them to be unpredictable, but I'm also much better at controlling bikes now.

(Where's the thread on that safety-of-e-bikes research?  It concluded that a major hazard was through making cycling accessible to people who wouldn't otherwise cycle, and potentially lacking in cycling experience, a significant proportion of e-bike accidents were due to loss of control at low speed.)
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 25, 2018, 04:28:30 pm
Dunno where that thread is, but some time ago a friend borrowed an e-bike from [either her employer or the City Council, I can't remember]. She's a lifelong utility cyclist now with dodgy knees, but concluded after a month's trial the e-bike was not good for her as it was so heavy and high in CoG that she was dropping it at stand still.

However, one thing she doesn't do is close-pass walkers on shared-use paths...
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 25, 2018, 04:34:00 pm
Dunno where that thread is, but some time ago a friend borrowed an e-bike from [either her employer or the City Council, I can't remember]. She's a lifelong utility cyclist now with dodgy knees, but concluded after a month's trial the e-bike was not good for her as it was so heavy and high in CoG that she was dropping it at stand still.

That's definitely an issue with e-bikes.  They're necessarily quite heavy, and on many the weight distribution doesn't help (battery on the rear rack above a rear hub motor, for example).  The better-engineered ones in that regard are of course £BloodyHellHowMuch
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 25, 2018, 04:40:29 pm
Anyway, as for close-passing walkers, it's reasonably simple:  Try to get their attention and let them get all the OMG! A bike! leaping out of their system before you get close enough to be a hazard.  Given the distance that polite noises carry, this usually involves riding relatively slowly.

If you can't give them the width, children and other animals[1] should be passed dead slow, as they'll probably dive for your wheel at the last second.

That leaves you with the hearing-impaired and [ear]phone zombies.  They're probably going to flinch when they see you, so aim for as big a gap as possible (waiting as necessary to avoid additional hazards like chutney and mooring bollards), and pass at a speed that means it won't hurt too much if it all goes wrong.

Accept that as the out-group member and operator of the more hazardous vehicle, it's all your fault.

And if you can't do that, don't cycle on shared-use paths.


[1] With the exception of the Aston ASBO Geese, for whom ramming speed is entirely appropriate.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: hubner on October 27, 2018, 12:31:15 pm
Last night on a straight fairly narrow path; wide enough for 3 cyclists with a small gap in between them. It's after sunset and dark and the path has dim lighting.

I'm riding well to the left to give max when passing and I see 2 cyclist coming, one in the middle of the path and other to their left, both have got similar bright dazzling lights.

At almost the passing point, there's another cyclist with no lights almost dead ahead of me, ie there's actually three riders spread out across the path. As I'm almost at the left edge of the path, I didn't hit the unlit rider and passed extremely close.

I don't know if it was a group of 3 riders or it was one unlit cyclist overtaking two riding together.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 27, 2018, 09:55:35 pm
That one leads into a related rant: Cyclists who, when faced with an oncoming cyclist, abandon the keep-left rule as soon as it's not a road.  I'll accept that some cyclists (most children, and some off-road leisure riders) probably don't cycle on the road and haven't internalised this rule properly.  I'll also make allowances for FOREIGNS whose collision-avoidance habits are calibrated to work in ABROAD).  But seriously, commuter types, WTF?
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: teethgrinder on October 27, 2018, 11:15:41 pm
That one leads into a related rant: Cyclists who, when faced with an oncoming cyclist, abandon the keep-left rule as soon as it's not a road.  I'll accept that some cyclists (most children, and some off-road leisure riders) probably don't cycle on the road and haven't internalised this rule properly.  I'll also make allowances for FOREIGNS whose collision-avoidance habits are calibrated to work in ABROAD).  But seriously, commuter types, WTF?


Just to make things awkward on the Milton Keynes Redways, which are shared use cycleways, so pedestrians have priority. There is the Redway Code, that says cyclists should stay on the left but pedestrians stay on the right.
Some cyclists and pedestrians follow the rules. Others don't.
It's OK approaching pedestrians from behind with an oncoming cyclist or oncoming pedestrians. I just sit behind the pedestrians going my way, whichever side of the path they happen to be on, then wait until the oncoming users have passed before I overtake.
Trouble is that hardly anyone does the same, so when I'm approaching oncoming cyclists and pedestrians it sometimes gets messy and the rules don't make it any better even if they are followed.
It also gets messy on the sharp bends where you can't keep to one side to get around because they are not engineered properly for wheeled vehicles like roads are. The bollards at junctions being placed where you normally ride don't help either.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 27, 2018, 11:30:04 pm
Same problem as the old British Waterways advice that cyclists should pass pedestrians on the water side - it breaks down when you want to wait behind a pedestrian for an oncoming user to pass.  It would work slightly better if everyone just kept left, but as I said before, if you need that rule what you actually need are better paths that don't create conflict.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 27, 2018, 11:53:18 pm
FWIW I find it works best for a cyclist (me) if walkers walk on the right, so they're oncoming traffic for the cyclist, but runners run on the left. Slowing down to walking speed for more than about ten seconds is annoying and potentially destabilising, but if the walkers see you, you can all sort it out visually. Runners however are often closer to the speed of a leisure cyclist than to a walker, so it's easier to overtake them in an, erm, overtaking manoeuvre.

But mostly this:
It also gets messy on the sharp bends where you can't keep to one side to get around because they are not engineered properly for wheeled vehicles like roads are. The bollards at junctions being placed where you normally ride don't help either.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: mattc on October 28, 2018, 08:27:53 am
There is the Redway Code, that says cyclists should stay on the left but pedestrians stay on the right.

That sounds like it was written for a joke; how can we distribute everyone so that they all get in each-others way for as much of the time as possible?

EDIT:
Imagine a motorway where HGVs/coaches/caravans use the LH carriageway and everyone else uses the RH one.

Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: teethgrinder on October 28, 2018, 08:36:52 am

That sounds like it was written for a joke; how can me distribute everyone so that they all get in each-others way for as much of the time as possible?

My guess is that it was the same joker who planned the Redways (badly). I expect the idea came from the Highway Code.
The Redway Code is mostly a moot point anyway. I'd bet that less than half the population of Milton Keynes even know it exists, let alone have read it, or even remembered any of it. Not everyone who travels in Milton Keynes lives here either. I stick to the rules when they work but do whatever to make it easier.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: frankly frankie on October 28, 2018, 10:27:19 am
There is the Redway Code, that says cyclists should stay on the left but pedestrians stay on the right.

That sounds like it was written for a joke; how can me distribute everyone so that they all get in each-others way for as much of the time as possible?

The rule (or rather, the advice) is the same on any public highway that doesn't have a designated pavement for pedestrians (ie is shared use).
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: quixoticgeek on October 28, 2018, 04:44:14 pm
Last night on a straight fairly narrow path; wide enough for 3 cyclists with a small gap in between them. It's after sunset and dark and the path has dim lighting.

I'm riding well to the left to give max when passing and I see 2 cyclist coming, one in the middle of the path and other to their left, both have got similar bright dazzling lights.

At almost the passing point, there's another cyclist with no lights almost dead ahead of me, ie there's actually three riders spread out across the path. As I'm almost at the left edge of the path, I didn't hit the unlit rider and passed extremely close.

I don't know if it was a group of 3 riders or it was one unlit cyclist overtaking two riding together.

Did the 3rd cyclist's reflectors not give them away? I find that with the Dutch stealth cyclists, they might not have lights, but you can see them from the pedal reflectors.

Related to your story above of the 2 riders side by side. I was out in the east of .NL, and I saw a car coming towards me, as it got closer it then suddenly got much further away... Which confused my head somewhat. It was only a minute or two later that I passed the two cyclists with identical bikes and lights, that I realised the reason what I thought was a car from a distance was in fact a pair of cyclists and the reason it had got suddenly further away was because they had started riding closer together... The optical brain trickery was weird.

J
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 28, 2018, 05:37:45 pm
Did the 3rd cyclist's reflectors not give them away? I find that with the Dutch stealth cyclists, they might not have lights, but you can see them from the pedal reflectors.

Possibly not if there's another cyclist with a bright front light alongside?  While pedal reflectors can be surprisingly visible on unlit BSOists, they're much less obvious on properly lit bikes.  (Admittedly in the UK there are relatively few cyclists with both proper lighting and pedal reflectors.)
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: hubner on October 28, 2018, 06:17:28 pm
I don't think I saw any pedal reflectors, and in any case they're less visible on an oncoming cyclist depending on how they pedal, ie toes down or not. Also my front light is a STVZO, almost all of the light points down to a patch in front of me.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: quixoticgeek on October 28, 2018, 07:06:47 pm
I don't think I saw any pedal reflectors, and in any case they're less visible on an oncoming cyclist depending on how they pedal, ie toes down or not. Also my front light is a STVZO, almost all of the light points down to a patch in front of me.

My front light is also StVZO, being an Edulux II, German made. I spot reflectors with it just fine.

J
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: aidan.f on October 28, 2018, 08:18:32 pm
Reads as impossible to see a pair of pedal reflectors against, as the OP mentioned, a foreground of two dazzling lights
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Craigus on October 29, 2018, 11:43:35 am
I appreciate this post may not be particularly helpful as it is likely not possible for some people to avoid using these shared paths without taking a large detour or using a dangerous road, but I've made the choice to avoid them all together favouring using a busy road that runs parallel - much to the irritation of a couple of motorists.

On my daily commute there are a couple of stretches of busy town road with shared paths on the pavement, I would rather chance my luck with the vehicles after seeing a good few near misses, cars pulling out of driveways across the path, and my own near miss with a pedestrian.

They are inadequate in my opinion, for all but a few cyclists who are happy to plod along at just above walking pace in the daytime. Night time use is a whole other matter.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: Kim on October 29, 2018, 12:41:39 pm
I often choose different routes (road vs shared use) depending on what I'm riding, why, and who with.  I think that's fairly normal in a country where most cycle infrastructure is unattractive to cycle on.  The important point is that for some slower or less confident cyclists it's a choice between off-road routes and not cycling.
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: quixoticgeek on October 30, 2018, 05:08:36 pm
I appreciate this post may not be particularly helpful as it is likely not possible for some people to avoid using these shared paths without taking a large detour or using a dangerous road, but I've made the choice to avoid them all together favouring using a busy road that runs parallel - much to the irritation of a couple of motorists.

On my daily commute there are a couple of stretches of busy town road with shared paths on the pavement, I would rather chance my luck with the vehicles after seeing a good few near misses, cars pulling out of driveways across the path, and my own near miss with a pedestrian.

They are inadequate in my opinion, for all but a few cyclists who are happy to plod along at just above walking pace in the daytime. Night time use is a whole other matter.

I would say this is an implementation problem. No Dutch city would run a shared use path next to a busy road. Shared used paths tend to be through the middle of parks, where if you can deal with the people, it's worth it for the pleasant environment. But they also tend to be wider and better implemented.

J
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: tonycollinet on November 01, 2018, 06:50:45 am

....And if you can't do that, don't cycle on shared-use paths.


Trudat
Title: Re: Shared use paths close passing
Post by: telstarbox on November 01, 2018, 11:45:11 am
I often choose different routes (road vs shared use) depending on what I'm riding, why, and who with.  I think that's fairly normal in a country where most cycle infrastructure is unattractive to cycle on.  The important point is that for some slower or less confident cyclists it's a choice between off-road routes and not cycling.

And "when". What people call "busy roads" aren't necessarily busy at all times of the day.