The Independent - campaign - "Save our Cyclists"

General cycling advice ( NOT technical ! )
Richard Mann
Posts: 427
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 12:46am

Re: The Independent - campaign - "Save our Cyclists"

Post by Richard Mann »

aprildavy wrote:Please don't undertake traffic ever...


That isn't realistic in standing traffic. You need to be much more specific & precise: don't get caught on the inside of a lorry when the lights change.

The chances of that happening are much reduced if there's an ASL and the lanes are either very narrow (no more than 3m), or there's a cycle lane.
Jonty

Re: The Independent - campaign - "Save our Cyclists"

Post by Jonty »

Why is there a need for such a campaign if cycling is such a safe activity?
jonty
TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

The Independent - campaign - "Save our Cyclists"

Post by TonyR »

downfader wrote:
In my opinion there are ways to improve cycling and the image:
1. Segregation can work. It has been proven in The Netherlands that good facilities lead to a rise in cyclists numbers


That is incorrect. There has been no increase in cycling in the Netherlands as a result of their massive cycle facility building programme in the 80's and 90's and if you look at the Dutch Cycle Balance audit of city cycling provision, the only facilities that are included in the audit are cycle parking ones.

In the UK East Kilbride as a new town has pretty good segregated cycling facilities but they are virtually unused whereas Cambridge has had, until recently, very few and cycling is at Dutch levels.
AndyA
Posts: 525
Joined: 21 Mar 2009, 9:16pm
Location: Edinburgh

Re: The Independent - campaign - "Save our Cyclists"

Post by AndyA »

But concern is growing that the boom in cycling has started to reverse that trend. Provisional Department for Transport figures show 2,700 cyclists were killed or seriously injured on Britain's roads in the year ending June 2010, compared with 2,673 in the previous 12 months.


Lazy journalism - 37 more deaths/serious injuries is a 1.37% increase.
According to the article cycling miles have gone up 4%.
Obviously, no deaths/serious injuries would be a lot better but more cycling with less deaths/serious injuries per mile is a good thing I would have thought?

Do not undertake ever, it's the easiest way to avoid being crushed under a lorry/bus that cannot see you
downfader
Posts: 1074
Joined: 8 Feb 2009, 10:09pm
Contact:

Re: The Independent - campaign - "Save our Cyclists"

Post by downfader »

Jonty wrote:Why is there a need for such a campaign if cycling is such a safe activity?
jonty


Its about preventing what should have clearly been prevented, and acknowledges that even convicted drivers barely get a fair sentance. When a cyclist got a £2200 for an unlawful but very rare killing, why should drivers pay £300 when they pose a much higher risk and cause far more damage physically.

I think these are the points that need to be addressed.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/le ... 68652.html And now the victim blaming...
gilesjuk
Posts: 3270
Joined: 17 Mar 2008, 10:10pm

Re: The Independent - campaign - "Save our Cyclists"

Post by gilesjuk »

Jonty wrote:Why is there a need for such a campaign if cycling is such a safe activity?
jonty


Probably because people have died cycling in London and it is now a real problem if it is happening in London instead of up Norf'.
TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

The Independent - campaign - "Save our Cyclists"

Post by TonyR »

AndyA wrote:
Lazy journalism - 37 more deaths/serious injuries is a 1.37% increase.
According to the article cycling miles have gone up 4%.
Obviously, no deaths/serious injuries would be a lot better but more cycling with less deaths/serious injuries per mile is a good thing I would have thought?


The increase is not even statistically significant. Anything less than a change of 52 in a baseline of 2,700 is in the statistical noise.
TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

The Independent - campaign - "Save our Cyclists"

Post by TonyR »

gilesjuk wrote:
Probably because people have died cycling in London and it is now a real problem if it is happening in London instead of up Norf'.


Actually London is doing rather well. Over 3 million wobbly unhelmeted journeys on Boris Bikes and only a handful of minor injuries to show for it.
Jonty

Re: The Independent - campaign -

Post by Jonty »

TonyR wrote:
downfader wrote:
In my opinion there are ways to improve cycling and the image:
1. Segregation can work. It has been proven in The Netherlands that good facilities lead to a rise in cyclists numbers


That is incorrect. There has been no increase in cycling in the Netherlands as a result of their massive cycle facility building programme in the 80's and 90's and if you look at the Dutch Cycle Balance audit of city cycling provision, the only facilities that are included in the audit are cycle parking ones.

In the UK East Kilbride as a new town has pretty good segregated cycling facilities but they are virtually unused whereas Cambridge has had, until recently, very few and cycling is at Dutch levels.


Frankly I don't think it's particularly meaningful to compare the relative experiences of Cambridge and East Kilbride. Surely the relevant question is "is it not the case that the provision of more segregated cycling facilities in Cambridge would be likely to encourage even higher levels of cycling in that city?
jonty
Jonty

Re: The Independent - campaign - "Save our Cyclists"

Post by Jonty »

gilesjuk wrote:
Jonty wrote:Why is there a need for such a campaign if cycling is such a safe activity?
jonty


Probably because people have died cycling in London and it is now a real problem if it is happening in London instead of up Norf'.


You don't really believe that, do you? :?
jonty
snibgo
Posts: 4604
Joined: 29 Jun 2010, 4:45am

Re: The Independent - campaign - "Save our Cyclists"

Post by snibgo »

Jonty wrote:Surely the relevant question is "is it not the case that the provision of more segregated cycling facilities in Cambridge would be likely to encourage even higher levels of cycling in that city?

At the risk of going off-topic, my answer would be "no".

Segregation doesn't increase cycling levels much. Reducing the convenience of driving does.
gilesjuk
Posts: 3270
Joined: 17 Mar 2008, 10:10pm

Re: The Independent - campaign - "Save our Cyclists"

Post by gilesjuk »

Jonty wrote:You don't really believe that, do you? :?
jonty


Well the campaign I've read mentioned the number of deaths in London.

Anyway it's amazing how many internet forums are fairly London centric. They'll talk about a road and not even mention the town it is in.
downfader
Posts: 1074
Joined: 8 Feb 2009, 10:09pm
Contact:

Re: The Independent - campaign -

Post by downfader »

TonyR wrote:
downfader wrote:
In my opinion there are ways to improve cycling and the image:
1. Segregation can work. It has been proven in The Netherlands that good facilities lead to a rise in cyclists numbers


That is incorrect. There has been no increase in cycling in the Netherlands as a result of their massive cycle facility building programme in the 80's and 90's and if you look at the Dutch Cycle Balance audit of city cycling provision, the only facilities that are included in the audit are cycle parking ones.

In the UK East Kilbride as a new town has pretty good segregated cycling facilities but they are virtually unused whereas Cambridge has had, until recently, very few and cycling is at Dutch levels.


Sorry I missed this.

My understanding was that there was a rise in both numbers of cyclists and trips made as a result. I accept I could be wrong. However often cited by UK citizens is how they would cycle but are too scared of motorised traffic. The Skyrides showed a vast number of people get out on their bikes when they wouldnt have normally done so. There is a demand, we just have to provide for it.
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19328
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: The Independent - campaign - "Save our Cyclists"

Post by [XAP]Bob »

aprildavy wrote:I noted the article said
Campaigners called for hauliers to be compelled to buy equipment which alerts drivers if a cyclist pulls up alongside them and brings the vehicle to an automatic halt if there is a risk of a collision.


Please don't undertake traffic ever - it leads directly to the undertaker - sorry, I feel strongly about this. In equal measure, Cyclists need a lot of training also. OK, we shouldn't need to be twice as good road users as other road users, but we need to be better at road craft than they are - because we will always lose in a collision situation.


Can we please tell the town planners this, and stop putting silly cycle "tight ropes"* on the left of traffic.

Filtering past traffic on the left can be safe, but you need to aware of the traffic you are filtering past, any junctions you may be approaching, the cause of the queue (e.g. lights) etc.
Never get stuck on either side of any vehicle - merge back into the traffic as it starts up again, or get in front of it completely.


Cycling is a safe activity, but there are things you can do increase that risk (like sitting just inside left indicating HGVs). Even if you do this frequently your risks are still small, but the danger is large - why not educate people so they don't do that?

You'll note that I'm not advocating a change in the law, or compulsory training - just a generic educational campaign.

Personally I would advocate two pieces of legislation, both are "large vehicle" specific, neither are particularly onerous.
- Repeater indicators (so that you can see a vehicle is indicating even from the side)
- Better mirrors**

Bob

* They're often not wide enough to be credited as lanes.
**I was on a coach this week with three mirrors per rabbit ear, one looking at traffic behind, one looking alongside the vehicle, one looking across the front. The driver really did have excellent visibility all around the vehicle (except directly behind, but nothing other than CCTV can deal with that).
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
vjosullivan
Posts: 417
Joined: 31 Oct 2010, 12:06am

Re: The Independent - campaign - "Save our Cyclists"

Post by vjosullivan »

snibgo wrote:
Jonty wrote:Segregation doesn't increase cycling levels much. Reducing the convenience of driving does.

This may well explain the relative popularity of cycling in Cambridge; where the cycling population is overwhelmingly students who are not permitted by the University (unless things have changed) to keep a car in the town.
E25
Post Reply