Cyclist escapes prosecution after fatal collision with pensioner

[Alex321]

I meant footpath, not footway.

And this is looking at Strava segments in my locality, not Regent's park. I think cyclists riding on cycle ways which are shared with pedestrians should not be riding at high speeds, unless they are arrow straight, have perfect sight lines and don't involve any junctions or places from which pedestrians may emerge.

A pedestrian using or stepping onto such a cycle way is not going to anticipate cyclists riding along at 30+ mph. Neither are many other cyclists for that matter.

Nor is 30+ mph going to happen.

20+, yes, but not 30. Even in the case that started this thread, where they were riding in a pace line, faster than most cyclists c`n amange, they were only doing somewhere between 25 and 30mph.

Yes, we shouldn't be cycling fast in those situation, but overstating the likely speeds doesn't help.

 

[PedallingNowhereSlowly]

Nor is 30+ mph going to happen.

20+, yes, but not 30. Even in the case that started this thread, where they were riding in a pace line, faster than most cyclists c`n amange, they were only doing somewhere between 25 and 30mph.

Yes, we shouldn't be cycling fast in those situation, but overstating the likely speeds doesn't help.

I beg to differ. This route lies between a suburban street and a footway. There's a good gradient leading down to it. I'd evidence it but it's too close to my gaff. It's low hanging fruit.

And FTR when I was at full fitness I could exceed 35 mph on the flat when the need arose.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

And FTR when I was at full fitness I could exceed 35 mph on the flat

For about 2 seconds …

 

[Ming the Merciless]

And this is looking at Strava segments in my locality, not Regent's park.

Not really of relevance to this thread then

 

[PedallingNowhereSlowly]

For about 2 seconds …

For quite some time - enough to cover a Strava Segment.

I could average 20 mph on an 18 mile commute from New Mills to Salford, and that's with stopping at every red traffic light and taking care to pass queuing traffic safely, on an Audax bike with panniers and luggage. On a Carbon Road bike I could add a couple of mph to that. I could also ride over the Snake Pass on an 86" fixed gear. And back again.

 

[PedallingNowhereSlowly]

Not really of relevance to this thread then

Absolutely relevant that cyclists appear to be doing inappropriate speeds in inappropriate places.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

I could average 20 mph on an 18 mile commute

Is somewhat easier than maintaining 35 mph on the flat. For 35 mph you’d need to be putting out 977 watts. Just how long do you think you were putting out those numbers?

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Absolutely relevant that cyclists appear to be doing inappropriate speeds in inappropriate places.

One is a place we can see is a road and allows motor vehicles. The other place may as well be made up, and serves no more purpose than a straw man.

 

[PK99]

Nor is 30+ mph going to happen.

20+, yes, but not 30. Even in the case that started this thread, where they were riding in a pace line, faster than most cyclists c`n amange, they were only doing somewhere between 25 and 30mph.

Yes, we shouldn't be cycling fast in those situation, but overstating the likely speeds doesn't help.

Freewheel down wimbledon hill or some of hills in Richmond Park and 30plus is easy.

The most egregious example I saw was a guy in tight tuck and pedalling furiously Down Wimbledon Hill with an enormous grip on his face.

 

[PedallingNowhereSlowly]

One is a place we can see is a road and allows motor vehicles. The other place may as well be made up, and serves no more purpose than a straw man.

On a road near a busy park pedestrians are crossing, that happens to have a 20 mph speed limit. No one should have been riding on someones wheel at 29 mph without full visibility of what was up ahead.

And equally no one should be riding through local parks at 30+ mph.

These things I suspect are fuelled by the same thing - competition.

Is somewhat easier than maintaining 35 mph on the flat. For 35 mph you’d need to be putting out 977 watts. Just how long do you think you were putting out those numbers?

Closer to 770 Watts. And I can perfectly believe that. I put a half assed effort into a virtual time trial at the National Cycle Show one year - I was cajoled into it. Despite having done a ridiculous ride the day before I finished 5th with an average power output over the course a hair shy of 500 Watts.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Closer to 770 Watts.

Nope, I ran it through an online calculator, to get that number, . Find one that shows 35 mph at 770 watts on the flat on a road bike, and share a link.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Down Wimbledon Hill with an enormous grip on his face.

Probably trying to get to hospital as quickly as possible, to get this enormous grip removed.

 

[PedallingNowhereSlowly]

Nope, I ran it through an online calculator, to get that number, . Find one that shows 35 mph at 770 watts on the flat on a road bike, and share a link.

I'm not playing this game. This is going to turn into a urinating competition around cycling power calculators.

And this detracts from my point. No one should be riding through local parks at 30+ mph or around them in a pace line at ~ 29 mph.
On Edit: Outside of a special cycling event where routes are temporarily closed to pedestrians.

 

[mjr]

My entire point is that cyclists should not be riding at anything like over 30 mph where they can expect to come into conflict with pedestrians.

What does this phrase "where they can expect to come into conflict with pedestrians" even mean? One stretch of cycleway into my local town centre is 9m wide and dead straight with only narrow lampposts in the middle to obstruct visibility. There's maybe a metre of verge to trees either side. It's packed with people walking and cycling at peak times, so is it where I can expect to come into conflict with pedestrians? Yet off-peak, you could do 40 along there and the biggest danger would normally be the cobbled hump junction in the middle rattling the nuts off your bike. I expect there's some astonishing speeds on Strava for it, set very early morning, but I'm not a user of it.

I'm sure that people have long used that and another straight open flat section past the paper mill for seeing how fast they can cycle. The main problem is that Strava now encourages stupid people to publish their speeds.

 

[PedallingNowhereSlowly]

What does this phrase "where they can expect to come into conflict with pedestrians" even mean? One stretch of cycleway into my local town centre is 9m wide and dead straight with only narrow lampposts in the middle to obstruct visibility. There's maybe a metre of verge to trees either side. It's packed with people walking and cycling at peak times, so is it where I can expect to come into conflict with pedestrians? Yet off-peak, you could do 40 along there and the biggest danger would normally be the cobbled hump junction in the middle rattling the nuts off your bike. I expect there's some astonishing speeds on Strava for it, set very early morning, but I'm not a user of it.

I'm sure that people have long used that and another straight open flat section past the paper mill for seeing how fast they can cycle. The main problem is that Strava now encourages stupid people to publish their speeds.

So no pedestrians who would not anticipate a cyclist travelling at 40 will use it off-peak?