Originally Posted by
genec
On fast streets with heavy traffic you will find making those left turns quite difficult if not impossible, (John Forester then tells you to become a "road sneak") you will not be able to "control the lane" but will be crowded over to the far right side by honking aggressive motorists. Thus VC fails, it is not "turned off."
The very statement you make above "bolded" is what I am also saying... and for those situations where vehicular cycling "fails" (as indeed not everyone is of the same skill, nor has the same nerve) alternative paths should exist.
Saying that 'VC fails' is like saying that the rules of the road fail. Perhaps some do, but as far as merging across lanes and making turns, they are all clearly spelled out in the rules. The only failng is in the part of other road users that attempt to deny cyclists the ability to do so with bullying tactics. A point, I believe, you've repeatedly made.
It's the unfettered aggression, no matter how overstated it is sometimes, of motorists that creates the perception of danger.
The only way you could ever say 'VC fails' is if the configuration of the road or path makes it impossible to follow the rules of the road, and in that case it's the road that fails, and it fails equally for every road user. Thankfully, those places are rare.
Originally Posted by
genec
The failing I see of vehicular cycling is that of not teaching it to every cyclist... and not informing the motoring public that indeed we have rights to the road. I still contend that many motorists have no clue that we have the same rights to the road as they. Yet vehicular cyclists insist that "all roads are bike lanes," when clearly there are roads that only the most skilled can handle.
They don't require any more skill. The same skills apply irrespective of the traffic. If you can hold a line, and ride one handed for signalling, you're golden. Some just require a bit more bravado, and that usually comes with experience.
To be fair, I do believe educating all cyclists and informing the motoring public is the VCists stated aim. They haven't been very effective at it to date, but they get points for trying.
Originally Posted by
genec
Further, surface streets do not have to be designed as freeways with 50, even 60MPH posted speeds and high speed free merges, as those types of roads are decidedly not cyclist friendly.
Well, no. I ride plenty of non-cyclist freindly roads. Not necesserily by choice, but I refuse to be cowed off riding any road I need to. If that's what they're building, that's what I ride on. Until the cycling utopia we all dream off eventuates, I'm making do. Some make do by riding on the footpath, or seeking out off road bikepaths or quieter routes, and that's fine too.