Scottish 6 Days - Day 5

[pete.owens]

First – I’d like to make clear that I am not having a go at the orgasnisers who are obviously working extremely hard to make the event run as smoothly as possible. They have far more to think about than worrying about causing offence to cyclists.

I know this may appear over sensitive, but, as someone who has used a bike for normal daily transport for 40 years or so, I have encountered this sort of casual unthinking anti-cycling bias far too often to leave it unanswered.

I'm sorry, Pete, you are having a go at the organisers and they do not deserve it. Those of them I know personally are all cyclists and very much pro-bike

Well perhaps they should have a word with whoever has made it abundantly clear on the event website that cyclists are unwelcome at this event due to the limited overtaking opportunities, with the clear expectation that cyclists should not under any circumstances get in the way of motor traffic. This is not a thought that would even cross the mind any regular cyclist who would know from their daily commuting experience that cycling is a solution to congestion - not a cause of delay.

You are also having a go at your fellow orienteers who drive cars, by attributing to them the worst habits you have experienced in the general car-driving population:

Not at all. On the contrary from my experience of the general driving population, I am absolutely confident that the vast majority of competitors will be perfectly rational and understand that the delays that they will undoubtedly experience are down to volume of motor traffic attempting to use a road not designed for the purpose, and also realise the utter pointlessness of attempting to overtake other road users moving marginally slower than themselves only to arrive at the back of the queue at the next bottleneck.

Even if you cannot exercise your god given right to overtake a cyclist the very second you come across them and, horror of horrors, have to slow down to cycling pace for a few hundred metres (assuming that the traffic would have been moving faster than that in the first place) this is not going to delay your arrival at the event – you will still take your place at the back of the very same queue you would have anyway.

Which, however euphemistically you dress it up with more polite language and undefined concerns about safety is exactly the concern expressed on the event website.

I am a cyclist too, and know exactly what you mean, but to suggest that those who choose to use their car to travel to the assembly area will all be guilty of this is quite offensive.

I am not attributing that to everyone who will be driving to the event (for a start plenty of them will be people who would have cycled if the organisers hadn't told them not to) - just whoever expressed exactly those sentiments on the event website.

I may well cycle to the assembly area

Despite the explicit request of those "pro-cyclist" event organisers not to.

and am quite happy that I can travel at the same speed as the cars are likely to be moving,

Thus implicitly accepting the auto-centric world view that a mere cyclist has no business getting in the way of motor vehicles. I am confident that even the slowest cyclist could maintain an average speed faster than the cars. However, there will be occasions when drivers could outrun Mark Cavendish - this would not get them to the event any earlier just hasten their arrival at the back of the next queue.

but it's nice of the organisers to warn me of the volume of vehicle traffic. More to the point, though, is that, were I a parent of young children, I would be pleased to know of the likely road conditions if I was considering having them cycle to assembly.

However you attempt to twist it this is not what is expressed in the section on cycling, which is an instruction not to cycle for fear of slowing down those who might want to overtake.

However, it is pretty clear from reading the rest of the section that attempting to drive to the event will be very time consuming. I have an early start and I have absolutely no intention of getting up an hour earlier in order to clog the road up with yet another car.

[andypat]

Well perhaps they should have a word with whoever has made it abundantly clear on the event website that cyclists are unwelcome at this event due to the limited overtaking opportunities

However you attempt to twist it this is not what is expressed in the section on cycling, which is an instruction not to cycle for fear of slowing down those who might want to overtake.

Pete you are either deliberately misunderstanding the website (which by the way is run by one of the organisers so yes you are having a go at them) in order to further your own pro-cycling agenda, or you are being blinded by your ire. Paul is wisely staying out of this one, but I'll happily take you on.

All of the information on cycling which you attribute to "the event" is relevant to Day 5 only due to the unfortunate circumstances caused by the parking issue and the requirement to manage traffic and shuttle buses. It has nothing whatsoever to do with any motorists desire or not to overtake a bike, but to the overall traffic management plan.

I cannot find any information on the website suggesting cycling is anything other than encouraged on all of the other days including the rest day.

If you cannot accept that these organisers have spent hours and hours of their own time planning this to minimise the effects on the orienteering (which after all is why we are going NOT for the cycling) then I would politely suggest you find youself a nice quiet backroad on Day 5 and cycle off up that leaving the rest of us to get on our buses!

[DaveR]

Pete, I think you are indeed being a bit over sensitive.
I cycle commute 3000+km per year year through Glasgow and am well aware of casual anti-cyclist bias but I think you have picked the wrong target here.

I think it is pretty obvious that the main problem is that:

"The car park is at the end of a 2km long narrow single track road."

This road is not really suitable for the peak volume of traffic expected but is the best available option (after huge efforts by a large number of people).
I would happily cycle along it to get to the Day 5 as I'm quite happy in high traffic, but I wouldn't encourage my less confident daughters to cycle that road on that day.

What I take the web site to say is:
Getting to Day 5 will be busy and awkward for everyone. Please be patient, considerate and tolerant. Cycling is likely to be unpleasant (but if you are used to that sort of thing it will be fine).

[Mrs H]

Pete - I am willing you to come up with a comprehensive and viable transport plan for the event which will get everyone there safely and on time - and acceptable wording to accompany it - but you haven't done it yet.

I don't think for one moment that the organisers have a political agenda - but if my experiences of organising big multi days events are anything to go by - I bet they have permanent indigestion and poor sleep patterns and are already vowing never to do anything like this again.

Reading the details for Day 5 I'm surprised at it's inclusion as it seems to have a lot of problems - but I am totally sure it will be a great day.

When the organisers wanted us to cycle I was going to cycle, now I will catch the bus there and wade back - which will in itself be the sort of novel experience I relish and part of the adventure of the day.

I really don't think it is very fair of you to ascribe all these political and discriminatory over tones to hard working volunteers who just want to get people there as efficiently and safely as possible.

Oh and by the way - I would favour Clarksonian over Clarksonesque

[Urban]

Get a grip pete. 3000+ people can't bringtheir bikes and you clearly don't have a family to convey to assembly.
Well done organising team for a pragmatic transport plan.

[graeme]

Reading the details for Day 5 I'm surprised at it's inclusion as it seems to have a lot of problems -

There's usually one day which has problems, with late withdrawal of permission for this or that. But after a certain stage the possibility for setting up a whole new day for 3000 people from scratch becomes more work than taking flak from a few people who don't want to sit in a car for a bit. Or whatever workaround has to be done - in the events I've planned/controlled we had to live with remote finish and very rough short courses.

The Lochnell peninsula looks fantastic. And someone nicked my bike on Sunday, so I'm glad not to be walking 10km.

[andypat]

Ironically I think the proximity of Day 5 to the event centre would have been seen as one of the plus points.

[EddieH]

Your assumption Pete that there will be an inevitable tailback into the car park field does not match my recent experience of any 6 day event. Parking is normally efficiently organised and people simply drive in nd are sent to the next parking zone. I suspect if we have very wet weather there may be queues - otherwise I'd not expect any which would rather negate a great deal of what you say.

[Paul Frost]

Well perhaps they should have a word with whoever has made it abundantly clear on the event website that cyclists are unwelcome at this event due to the limited overtaking opportunities, with the clear expectation that cyclists should not under any circumstances get in the way of motor traffic...

I was intending to stay out of this, as I'm the one that choose the wording, but I'm bored. The sun is shining and I could be out orienteering on Kerrera, but there are 80 SI units that need to have the firmware upgraded. It takes about 4 minutes for each one to complete, so whilst waiting for each one there is not much I can get on with, apart from reading Nope.

Some people believe that we should be banning all cycling following a risk assessment under health and safety grounds. I thought that was a bit strong, and so came up with the wording on the website.

I am a keen cyclist, but I often cycle with people who are not confident on busy roads, so am aware of the issues. The wording was designed to put off the casual holiday cyclist who may have thought a nice ride down a country lane would be idyllic. I was sure people like yourself would just say "stuff it, I'll do what I want", and not worry about anyone else.
So I was half right, I thought a complete ban might have upset you and caused you to rant about liberty, rights, freedom etc. So I was quite surprised when my carefully chosen words were construed as an attack on cyclists and bought down this huge pile of steaming @$*! on my head.

I guess I better sell my 3 bikes quick and get a white van, so I can live up to the image you have created of me.

I keep hearing something in my head about "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few", but hey, that's just in movies.

Unless I get another boring job, this is the last I'm going to say on this subject.

Please note: the views expressed above are my own and not on behalf of the Scottish 6 Day company.

[pigweed]

This discussion is getting silly, especially before the event has even taken place. Let those that want to cycle, cycle; and those that want to drive, drive, and then afterwards discuss any problems.

I'll probably be cycling to this event myself though with my reputation I expect people might notice I'm faster cycling then driving.

[bob]

Pete, if you cycle in at the same time of day that you put posts on Nopesport you'll have the road to yourself

[Paul Frost]

I visited the road today and took a few pictures to demonstrate how narrow and potentially fast the road is. We were doing 40mph at times and it didn't seem very fast (a very keen cyclist would be hard pushed to average 15-18mph).
The road is arrow straight most of the time with very few passing places and excellent visibility ahead.
With traffic controlled and a one way/convoy system in operation, the returning buses will be able to do the return journey very quickly, unless...
Click to View full size and some other images.

[Drumlough]

Just wondering if pallets have been considered to make a raised pathway through the marsh.

[blindasabat]

I visited the road today and took a few pictures to demonstrate how narrow and potentially fast the road is. We were doing 40mph at times and it didn't seem very fast .

Exactly the sort of petrol-head thinking that makes rural roads the most dangerous roads to use. 30mph is fast enough on ANY single track road!

[IanD]

30mph is fast enough on ANY single track road!

The sort of comment that gets the cyclist lobby a bad name.

I have no idea whether 40mph is safe on this particular road, and neither have you.

But there are single-track roads where the visibility, both of other traffic and of animals potentially crossing the road, is good enough to permit 40mph.