Cyclone Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 With a bit of work, that elongated car park could be converted to a very usable bit of road. Given the crisis our roads are in at the moment, I think it's vital to, rather than misdirecting the blame for holdups onto cyclists, start to see the real source of the problem, which is that many of the blocked roads routinely have bumper to bumper parked cars, taking up space which could be used for moving cars, and, for passing cyclists. Road capacity is defined by junction capacity, not by tarmac space. Can you think of anywhere that the tram runs in the right hand lane, and would thus be able to pass a bike? And can you imagine cars trying to also pass the cyclist at the same time, in the cyclists lane (because I can). The tram stops regularly, it always stays in the left hand lane (not that it runs up any two lane roads AFAIK). I'm not- you are. I've no idea of the history of where that parking space came from, and, it's not relevant to the point I'm making. Well then stop claiming that the parked cars are taking up a lane, they aren't. That's a parking area, and was never a lane, and it couldn't be a lane. You're not making sense. Currently. Yes. Currently. You said they should have left them at home. But "currently" they already had. The roads are only going to get more full, more jammed, more clogged, and, the only way change for the better can happen is if big changes are made, such as eliminating long lines of parked cars on main roads, as well as reducing car numbers in general. Eliminating cars that are parked OFF the road will not alter the road capacity. And you've got about as much chance of reducing car numbers as you have of convincing anyone that the bus is convenient and pleasant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richkent Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Can you think of anywhere that the tram runs in the right hand lane Norton Avenue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Norton Avenue https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Norton+Ave,+Sheffield,+South+Yorkshire+S12+2LB/@53.344417,-1.427749,3a,75y,238.18h,78.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sMtXgPlNOEaEKo3dgan5blw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DMtXgPlNOEaEKo3dgan5blw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D100%26h%3D80%26yaw%3D136.62903%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x487982d781361801:0x1ce6f8980488d4c6 Yep. I've never seen/noticed that before. ---------- Post added 30-06-2015 at 15:46 ---------- Is that because it goes back into it's own central area further on? So that it doesn't have to cut across another lane as it does that. ---------- Post added 30-06-2015 at 15:48 ---------- I wouldn't want to be a cyclist in the left hand lane as the tram goes past in the rhl and cars still try to squeeze past the bike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damageandy Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Sorry if I didn't make it clear. My point was that you can only over take a cyclist on a double white line if you can tell the road is clear, I don't think that the driver could going by the photo. i know that corner and stretch of road, it is a blind bend, the driver had no idea if another vehicle was coming the other way. If something was coming the otherway with the speed of that road and how sharp the bend is it would have resulted in a head on, a car flying off the road to aviod, the driver cutting in very sharply probaby swiping the cyclist or if very lucky a very close call for everone involved. From the second photo non of those cars had enough visability to safely overtake, simply not enough space if someone is coing the other way doing 50mph or more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Eliminating cars that are parked OFF the road will not alter the road capacity. That's why I'm talking about reducing cars parked ON the road. Which will make the roads capacity higher, and, facilitate the safe overtaking of cycles by cars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkleyIan Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 What you have to remember is that much of the supertram design dates way back to the late 70s , with the detailed design going on in the 80s. Accommodating the needs of cyclists just wasn't in the manual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damageandy Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Norton+Ave,+Sheffield,+South+Yorkshire+S12+2LB/@53.344417,-1.427749,3a,75y,238.18h,78.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sMtXgPlNOEaEKo3dgan5blw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DMtXgPlNOEaEKo3dgan5blw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D100%26h%3D80%26yaw%3D136.62903%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x487982d781361801:0x1ce6f8980488d4c6 Yep. I've never seen/noticed that before. ---------- Post added 30-06-2015 at 15:46 ---------- Is that because it goes back into it's own central area further on? So that it doesn't have to cut across another lane as it does that. ---------- Post added 30-06-2015 at 15:48 ---------- I wouldn't want to be a cyclist in the left hand lane as the tram goes past in the rhl and cars still try to squeeze past the bike. It runs on the right hand lane further up the road too on the ridgeway road section, then enters its own section (Tram stop) then goes back onto road and then into own section again (another tram stop). The tram lines then splits so trams can do a left turn down Gleadless road (also in right hand lane) or straight up and does a right turn across the carrage way to its own tracks tat run behind heardings park. I imagine it was mainly done that way because they have the trams stops on that section doubled up to save space? I always thought it was strange that on Ridgeway road Trams going one way run on the road but in the other direction they have ther own section. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattleonard Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 it`s obvious cyclists don`t think they have to stop for red lights.this morning a cyclist sailed through a red light,a car nearly wiped him out then the cyclist has a go at car driver then gets off his bike and starts banging his hands on the car bonnet,brain dead or what. It's obvious that motorists struggle to witness an incident without extrapolating a ludicrous generalisation about a group of people which they have completely arbitrarily bundled together into a single category in their heads. Brain dead or what. Or maybe, just maybe, it's only some motorists who are like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiseOwl182 Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Saw a cyclist run 2 consecutive red lights this morning. Wonder if he uses this forum? No, he can't do, because none of the cyclists on here ever run reds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_1 Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 You can cross the solid white line in certain circumstances From the HC rule 129.. "You may cross the line if necessary, provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less." I don't know if you cycle, but a Sunday morning ride into the Peak District will see dozens and dozens of cars overtaking you over double white lines, often just before blind bends and on blind crests (hence the solid whites!). And much of that time I'll be going way over 10mph unless it's a steep hill. It's not the passing that bothers me, it's the fact that if a vehicle comes the other way the one passing is going to swerve back in, potentially into you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts