Cycle Map

"Mk" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Off topic for one sentence, then i'm back. There is a dummy internet shop
at this address http://www.macromedia.com/go/flexapp_store. Notice the
price range slider at the bottom left. And as you drag it, the store
contents changes. Anyway, back on topic, a cyclist road map would have to
offer the same flexibility as the price slider on that dummy shop. So a
cyclist could choose his/her requirements from a slider dashboard, and
watch as the UK cycle map is redrawn accordingly, with routes faded in and
out in a similar fashion to the example website. Do you think that kind
of solution might work?

Mk

Personally I find looking at an OS map hugely useful, as it has contours on
it, I can decide where to avoid and it clearly shows what are *likely* to be
busy roads, so I can choose to avoid them. I think you have a need which
already has a solution :-)

Cheers, helen s

"Mk" <[email hidden]> wrote

[snip]

Anyway, back on topic, a cyclist road map would

Quoted message said:

have to offer the same flexibility as the price slider on that

dummy

Quoted message said:

shop. So a cyclist could choose his/her requirements from a slider
dashboard, and watch as the UK cycle map is redrawn accordingly,

with

Quoted message said:

routes faded in and out in a similar fashion to the example

website. Do

Quoted message said:

you think that kind of solution might work?

[snip]

There have been several attempts to draw up an official
"obnoxiousness" scale. For calculating the British index, see the
form on my web site www.jfparker.demon.co.uk/CRP2.txt The IHT,
having invented the scale, seems to be very reluctant to use it,
though. The Americans invented the idea, and there is more about the
subject on the web site of the Chicagoland Bicycle Federation, whose
URL I forget, but they're out there somewhere. The even have a
calculator to work the (US) ratings out.

Experienced (whatever that means) cyclists are reported in the USA to
rate any given road about one grade easier than would a novice. The
question is, are there any road features which wouldn't worry a
novice, but which would frighten an expert, or vice versa. I think
there are. I hate bike lanes, for example, as do many others on this
list, and the old style cycle tracks alongside main roads are worse.

The problem with this whole concept is that it has the wrong view
about problems. Novices combine being far too frightened of cycling
with not being frightened enough. They spend so much time worrying
about accidents that are rare enough to be freaks that they never
consider the things which will really get them.

Cars hit bikes where their paths intersect. Accidents happen at
intersections, rather than between them, and there isn't any scale,
so far as I know, to rate intersections. There's a guy, by the name
of Jon' Parkin, at the Bolton Institute, in Lancashire, who is
working on the problem, though. The problem with an intersection is
that for the average cross roads there are a dozen different paths
through it, each of which needs to be considered separately, and each
of which might change with time of day, as well.

The scales that we have generally rate obnoxiousness mainly by some
combination of kerb lane width, traffic speed, and traffic volume.
In these days of GIS systems, you would have thought that local
authorities would have that built into a database, but that doesn't
seem to be true. A few towns have rated all their streets
subjectively. Get the Cheltenham bike map for an example.

Because a proper map seems to be difficult, a couple of quick and
dirty substitutes have been tried. Cycle City Guides simply took the
data for an OS 1;250 000 map and made the road widths different. The
motorways (blue), A roads (red) and B roads (brown) were shown very
narrow, but the little yellow roads became great big wide yellow
roads. That didn't work out too well, however. One function of a
map is to be a picture of the countryside, and even if you don't use
them, it's the major roads which are the landmarks. I certainly
found the Cycle City maps confusing, and presumably I wasn't alone,
as they have given the idea up now.

Another idea suggested here in London is just to use the London noise
map, available on the web somewhere. The map shows only traffic
noise, which ought to correlate pretty well with traffic volume and
speed, and also with psychological effect on novices. The map is to
be extended to all Britain, I understand.

I hope this helps

Jeremy Parker

in message <[email hidden]>, Jeremy Parker

(') said:

The
question is, are there any road features which wouldn't worry a
novice, but which would frighten an expert, or vice versa.

Yup. Sharp bad-camber downhill bends. Narrow bridges on downhill bends,
particularly if hump-backed. Neither of these are dangerous at beginner
speeds, but they become sharply more dangerous as the speed goes up. If
cycling in cold weather, potential frost pockets on sharp bends, too.

By contrast, the things which are most frightening and most dangerous to
beginners (e.g. filtering right across three lanes of fast moving
traffic) can be quite a buzz and certainly not dangerous if you're
expert.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

((DoctorWho)ChristopherEccleston).act();
uk.co.bbc.TypecastException: actor does not want to be typecast.
[adapted from autofile on /., 31/03/05]

Response to Simon Brooke:

Quoted message said:

Yup. Sharp bad-camber downhill bends. Narrow bridges on downhill bends,
particularly if hump-backed. Neither of these are dangerous at beginner
speeds, but they become sharply more dangerous as the speed goes up. If
cycling in cold weather, potential frost pockets on sharp bends, too.

The maps might have to highlight some of these as plus-points for
trikers. ;-)

--
Mark, UK

"One of the gigs was in Kidderminster at a venue called Frank Freeman's
Dancing School. This was in the days when groups were called things like
Creedence Clearwater Revival or New Riders of the Purple Sage, and one of
the band said to me: 'Hey, that's a really groovy name.' 'Not really,' I
told him. 'It's a dancing school run by a man named Frank Freeman'."

Quoted message said:

Another idea suggested here in London is just to use the London noise
map, available on the web somewhere. The map shows only traffic
noise, which ought to correlate pretty well with traffic volume and
speed, and also with psychological effect on novices. The map is to
be extended to all Britain, I understand.

I hope this helps

Jeremy Parker

Yes, thanks, very informative.

I see it is more complicated than it first appears. I like the idea of
the Level of Service Assessment.

Although, as you say, an OS map is easy to read and any cycle map would
have to be very clever when rating roads. Although if you were looking
for a road with level A, you could expect it to be small and well
hidden, and an E rated road would typically be a major road.

I feel any road map has to be drawn for intermediate/expert riders. The
UK Road Map isn't built with learner drivers in mind.

I think even in cars, infrequent drivers perceive motorways to be more
dangerous than bendy country roads whereas the opposite is true.

My nan is an infrequent driver and she tries to avoid big roundabouts
with heavy traffic. If she was a cyclist, I think she would avoid
junctions with 1 or more e rated roads. Whereas, a junction of a B and
D rated road, she might be comfortable attempting. Of course, her
judgement has no basis on how dangerous it is, only on her
perception/comfort zone.

Mk

Quoted message said:

Although, as you say, an OS map is easy to read and any cycle map

would

Quoted message said:

have to be very clever when rating roads. Although if you were

looking

Quoted message said:

for a road with level A, you could expect it to be small and well
hidden, and an E rated road would typically be a major road.

Out in the country any little yellow road is probably ok. In the
Scottish Highlands even the A roads can be quite good.

I don't think roads are "well hidden" On a bike, intersections are
pretty obvious, and an OS map is essentially guaranteed to show all
of them. You just need to be able to count to the "third on the
left" or whatever. Even the OS Road Atlases are ok in the country -
get one to tear out the pages that you need when exploring a new
area.

A bike computer helps, so you know how far you have gone, so that you
know when your intersection should be coming up.

Bridle paths are a gamble. Some of them may be a beautifully
landscaped driveway leading to somebody's stately home, some might be
ankle deep mud, churned up by horses or tractors

A major road is major because that's where lots of people want to go.
If you have the same tastes as normal human beings, you might want to
go there too. On the other hand motorists are more prepared to
detour onto an indirect road, so long as it is a high speed road.
Remember, a "bypass" is called a bypass, because it avoids going to
actual destinations. Often there is an old road, better for bikes
The Romans and the 18th century turnpike designers designed pretty
good roads for bikes, except that the Romans would happily run a road
up an 8% gradient, which I feel is excessive. However, some roads
were designed for packhorses, and accepted a 33% gradient. That's
really excessive, but quite common. The old stagecoach roads have
milestones, too, especially erected by the Turnpike Commissioners for
you to calibrate your bike computer.

Jeremy Parker