Author Topic: Shared use paths close passing  (Read 4974 times)

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #100 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.
To ride the Windcheetah, first, you must embrace the cantilever...

Cudzoziemiec

  • Solar powered, tea fuelled cycle-wol
Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #101 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.
sideways bounding monkey lounging under fruit tree

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #102 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.

Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #103 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.

frankly frankie

  • I kid you not
    • Fuchsiaphile
Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #104 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).
"This is a complex subject, with a need for more than one highlighter pen."

quixoticgeek

  • Mostly Harmless
Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #105 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
--
Beer, bikes, and backpacking
http://b.42q.eu/

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #106 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.)
To ride the Windcheetah, first, you must embrace the cantilever...

Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #107 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.

quixoticgeek

  • Mostly Harmless
Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #108 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
--
Beer, bikes, and backpacking
http://b.42q.eu/

Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #109 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

Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #110 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.

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #111 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.
To ride the Windcheetah, first, you must embrace the cantilever...

quixoticgeek

  • Mostly Harmless
Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #112 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
--
Beer, bikes, and backpacking
http://b.42q.eu/

tonycollinet

  • No Longer a western province of Númenor
Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #113 on: November 01, 2018, 06:50:45 am »

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


Trudat

telstarbox

  • Loving the lanes
Re: Shared use paths close passing
« Reply #114 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.
2017 - R500 ✅ | 2018 - R1000 ✅ | 2019 - ?