Where are the signs telling walkers to keep left, not walk two or three abreast across the path, not to stop in the middle of the path, etc?
There are plenty of those signs on the track Jane Caro was on.
They need to put them on separate paths where possible. Where I ride there is room for a separate path, they should do it - because some peds are getting very un-sharing in the way they use the existing track (it's even reasonably wide)! I'm not the only one to suggest that.
While some bike riders go a bit too fast**, most ride to the conditions and behave in a sharing manner. But the pedestrians on the other hand, more of them are being quite dangerous in the way they use the path.
** just for some research - I had a go at the east-bound 4km strava segment KOM on my local track (the KOM holder shall remain anonymous). I clocked just over 38km/h average speed, good enough for a 4th place - on a stinking hot day with not a single person in sight. 1st place? 44km/h average speed, and I hope the track was closed off when that was achieved. If there were pedestrians or other cyclists about, it'd be too risky. At 38, that was fast enough, can't imagine doing 44 average!
I prefer to go for a hill instead, do repeats of that. Two car lanes wide and never any pedestrians - only a few other cyclists and the occasional snake, fox or goanna. There you can go as fast as you want without bother, although the sign says 40km/h speed limit - which I'm doing uphill. That's fun, it is safe and it's a good workout.
Hate to be the bearer of bad news gboaf, but the bay run has significant sections of separated paths- ie trees, plants & other physical barriers.
Does not cure the problem - idiots, whether on foot, car or bike, still find a way to endanger others
. . . . . . .
Well, they tried! Ultimately, bike riders can ride more safely by doing no more than 10km/h on shared paths, according to some people. This is what Scruby wanted I think. How many here would agree that this is the right thing to do?
I bet even the most vocal proponents of slower riding wouldn't go that slowly! it's so slow it is silly, but I've had to do it some times when a group just won't move.
Agree. At SOP they have a 10Km/h section at the Armoury. It is very hard to do 10 through there and I often find myself closer to 20. Yet I'm usually one of the slowest riders.
20 is quite a good speed, easy enough to stop. But if there are kids around, you need to be prepared for anything - which I'm sure you are. Even slower speed offs can can hurt.
I haven't been along to the area you mention, might head along there one time when I'm back on the bike again. I'm a bit of an M7 addict.
Last edited by g-boaf on Mon Jan 28, 2013 10:24 pm, edited 3 times in total.
That section is next to a busy play area which often has little kids on or near the path. Most new riders to the path would have no idea, plus there are few regulars to those ropes, it's mostly irregular visitors.
Speed limits are meaningless. The number of mad kids on the road proves it. Inattention hurts at 10kmh as well. If you want to amble without concentrating, there are better places like footpaths.
Yes some people would be pissed off no matter what speed you do. You can't legislate against stupidity.
And yes some pedestrians are idiots wandering on the wrong side of the path, 2 abreast or all other forms of stupidity.
At the end of the day, it is a shared path with pedestrian priority (at least the Cooks River path is).
You can't expect to ride as fast as you want. If there are blind corners, then of course you should be slow enough to avoid something around the corner. You can't blame an accident on bad design. I blame the idiot riding too fast for the conditions.
Agree that the bell should be used if necessary, not as a matter of course.
Motorists hate cyclists and cyclists hate the motorists and the pedestrians hate the bikers and everybody hates the trucks.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users