"You should be on the cyclepath!"

[presta]

"Ride at a sensible speed for the situation and ensure you can stop in time. As a general rule, if you want to cycle quickly, say in excess of 18 mph/30 kph, then you should be riding on the road."

I've seen that written down somewhere, it's not the Highway Code, so perhaps Cyclecraft.

 

[mjr]

DfT-suggested Code of Conduct for Cyclists (not sure if if was ever formally adopted):

No, it died a firey death in the consultation, roasted by responses including pointing out it conflicted with already-adopted government advice to build cycle tracks for 20mph average speed (which most councils failed at, but it was still the official advice).

 

[albion]

I got a second look at the Saltburn back route section of route one up from the promenade.
I got told off for cycling as I approached the summit.

It being a fast descent it has both a bridleway sign and a no cycling sign at the top. Logically it must not apply going uphill for which there is no such sign apart from the usual Sustrans one one, it also being a walking pace type hill.
I also assume, elsewhere, that 'cyclists dismount' are safety signs.

 

[Drago]

I heard someone - probably in the WWW not who knows how accurate - that originally pretty much everyone drove on the left

but that little (?) French bugger came along and took over most of Europe and decided that he wanted people to drive on the right

and after he got deported to Rwanda Elba most place he had been kept to the right

The UK - being superior - stayed as we were and exported the concept to the Empire


Some of that history may be a bit dodgy - or outright wrong - but that was something like what I saw

Hitler was driven on the right in his Merdedes.

This infuriated Churchill, and Britain went to war over that and the wearing of lederhosen.

 

[Mike_P]

There's an annoying Cyclists Dismount sign on a signed cycle route on a bridge over the railway and NCN67 in Harrogate which everyone ignores. At the northern end of the bridge the paths running parallel to the railway to either side have red circle cycling prohibited signs. Cyclists Dismount signs should be banned on paths IMO unless there is a clear danger and replaced if considered neccessary by Cyclists take care passing pedestrians.

 

[albion]

No, I they are actually correct in their actual invented purpose.
Better that than 'no cycling'.

 

[mjr]

No, I they are actually correct in their actual invented purpose.
Better that than 'no cycling'.

White on blue rectangular signs are information, so it's simply reminding you that cyclists dismount, so don't stand too close unless you like being hit by a leg swinging over.

If it was an instruction, it'd be black on white or yellow, or white on red, depending on the context.

 

[Mike_P]

The crazy thing about those signs is they are typically on paths whereby a cyclist wheeling a bike is going to take up the full width.

 

[DaveReading]

White on blue rectangular signs are information, so it's simply reminding you that cyclists dismount

Albeit grammatically incorrect ...

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

The crazy thing about those signs is they are typically on paths whereby a cyclist wheeling a bike is going to take up the full width.

Exactly
When the Runcorn-Widnes bridge was closed for a year (a year is well over 36 months isn't it????) then bicycles were allowed on the walkway down the outside most of the time

it is quite narrow - OK for about 3 people in width

so a cyclist ona hybrid type bike who is walking would take up most of the width
if they (I) rode - slowly and in a reasonable manner - then they (I) could easily stop and lean against the edge as walker coming the other way passed
but the signs clearly said to walk - which was daft

there was one bloke who complained - while I was actually stopped and allowing him to pass - but I think he was the sort to complain if there was a "Y" in the day!!
everyone else just said "Thanks" and carried on

 

[Rusty Nails]

Exactly
When the Runcorn-Widnes bridge was closed for a year (a year is well over 36 months isn't it????) then bicycles were allowed on the walkway down the outside most of the time

it is quite narrow - OK for about 3 people in width

so a cyclist ona hybrid type bike who is walking would take up most of the width
if they (I) rode - slowly and in a reasonable manner - then they (I) could easily stop and lean against the edge as walker coming the other way passed
but the signs clearly said to walk - which was daft

there was one bloke who complained - while I was actually stopped and allowing him to pass - but I think he was the sort to complain if there was a "Y" in the day!!
everyone else just said "Thanks" and carried on

How long is the path? Unless it is extremely long is anyone really vexed at the thought of walking for a minute or so?

Sounds like the same attitude as motorists who whine about the 20mph limit because it slows them down when, of course, they are perfectly capable of safely driving faster than that.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

How long is the path? Unless it is extremely long is anyone really vexed at the thought of walking for a minute or so?

Sounds like the same attitude as motorists who whine about the 20mph limit because it slows them down when, of course, they are perfectly capable of safely driving faster than that.

about 400m - so not all that far

but you know - some people!!!

 

[Mike_P]

Its not necessarily the length, its the obstruction caused by someone wheeling a bike compared to if they were cycling.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Its not necessarily the length, its the obstruction caused by someone wheeling a bike compared to if they were cycling.

exactly
my bars are quite wide and then the pedals have sharpish edges to them - if I ride it in a considerate manner, including going slowly, then everyone is better off if I stay on it rather than push it from the side
IMO

 

[matticus]

How long is the path? Unless it is extremely long is anyone really vexed at the thought of walking for a minute or so?

Sounds like the same attitude as motorists who whine about the 20mph limit because it slows them down when, of course, they are perfectly capable of safely driving faster than that.

They're not simply being asked to slow down, are they? (Plus as others have pointed out, a dismounted cyclist often makes life MORE difficult for pedestrians!)