'Cyclists targeted by speed bumps', from the BBC

[whole diary]

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the London Borough of Islington - not Barking, as I had initially supposed: see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8275237.stm 

[Btline]

Great - another perfectly good road ruined by calming measures.

Why can't someone start to get rid of them? IMO^▸ (in my opinion) they don't help the environment: many drivers think you have to go over them at <20 mph thus resulting in harsh breaking and acceleration instead of smooth 30; and, in the case of the "half road" humps, many drivers don't realise that if you position your wheels on either side of the bump, you won't be affected.

And in the case of pinchpoints - downright dangerous. It's only a matter of time before deaths occur...

And now their targeting bikes? Whatever next? Bumps on station concourses to slow down running commuters?

I despair...

[inspector_blakey]

The title of this thread gives me a strange image of speed bumps sneaking up on cyclists and stealing their lunch money.

But in all seriousness, I think major tyre damage spikes would be much more effective. 

[Not from Brighton]

A capable cyclist should be able to "bunny-hop" a speed hump and thus continue their journey unimpeded. The only downside to this method (as I found to my cost on one occasion) is that it is difficult to break suddenly whilst airborne which can result in accidents...

[inspector_blakey]

IMO^▸ (in my opinion) they don't help the environment: many drivers think you have to go over them at <20 mph thus resulting in harsh breaking and acceleration instead of smooth 30;

I may be missing something here, but is the idea of speed bumps not that you proceed down the road in question at a steady, slower speed rather than accelerating off one bump up to 30 then braking back down for the next one...? 

[eightf48544]

My first thoughts were there do seem to be an awefull lot of humps, but when you look at the path which is obviously shared by pedestrians as well   how else do you slow down cyclist.

Whilst cars and cyclist don't mix well it's the cyclist that usually comes off worse. However, speeding cyclist and pedestrains can be fatal.

I suppose they could have put a fence down the middle to segregate the users but it doesn't  look wide enough. The problem is the minority of cyclist who think that pedestrians shouldn't be on the footpath and try to ride as fast as possible where it's patently unsafe to do so.

IMO^▸ (in my opinion) the cyclists have only got themselves to blame.

I think the old and infirm pedestrians and parents with prams and buggies have got more right to complain that their previously smooth walkway is now covered with obstacles.

[Btline]

IMO^▸ (in my opinion) they don't help the environment: many drivers think you have to go over them at <20 mph thus resulting in harsh breaking and acceleration instead of smooth 30;

I may be missing something here, but is the idea of speed bumps not that you proceed down the road in question at a steady, slower speed rather than accelerating off one bump up to 30 then braking back down for the next one...? 

Tell that to the majority of drivers!