Motorcycles in bus lanes - surprising result to pilot study

Ben Lovejoy · Post by **Ben Lovejoy** » 25 Jan 2008, 9:25pm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/mai ... ane126.xml

Cyclist safety seems to have been increased, which the report ascribes to pedestrians getting to expect two-wheel traffic in bus lanes and thus pay more attention when crossing them.

Ben

George Riches · Post by **George Riches** » 26 Jan 2008, 3:03pm

Transport for London wrote:When an early draft of this report was put together we found that there were significant methodological issues as well as irregularities in the way data had been collected. This meant the validity of these early results was questionable. Further investigation of the data has now been carried out and the report is due to be published shortly. The Mayor will need to examine the full contents of the report and the trial results before taking a decision.

If you investigate the debate about cycle "helmets" you will soon discover that it is very easy to produce misleading data. It's easily enough done by accident (and what researcher would like to admit that his/her hard won data is invalid?), but lobbyists will twist anything to back their case.

As for motoring journos - how impartial are they when it comes to motorised verses un-motorised road users?

If properly conducted research will show that the dangers are few, why should motorcycle lobbyists prefer leaks of methodologically unsound data?

Ben Lovejoy · Post by **Ben Lovejoy** » 26 Jan 2008, 3:06pm

We'll only know the truth if we see both reports, but TfL approved the methodology in the first place, and only objected when the data didn't support its own contention ...

Ben

toontra · Post by **toontra** » 26 Jan 2008, 3:29pm

There's another thread on this: http://forum.ctc.org.uk/viewtopic.php?t ... highlight=

Can a mod combine these?

andymiller · Post by **andymiller** » 26 Jan 2008, 3:40pm

Best to wait for the final report?

toontra · Post by **toontra** » 26 Jan 2008, 3:55pm

andymiller wrote:Best to wait for the final report?

Report or no report, we can still discuss the issues as they appear to us from our experience.

My betting is the report in the article was sat on because either:

1) It's methodology was questionable

2) The use of bus lanes by motorcycles could have consequences not envisaged by the authors of the report

... or both.

Ben Lovejoy · Post by **Ben Lovejoy** » 26 Jan 2008, 4:02pm

My money is on:

3) Ken agreed to the pilot to play for time as he doesn't want to do it

toontra · Post by **toontra** » 26 Jan 2008, 4:06pm

Let's all bear in mind 40% of motorbikes (probably more in London) shouldn't be on the road at all, let alone in bus lanes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7200066.stm

toontra · Post by **toontra** » 26 Jan 2008, 4:09pm

Ben Lovejoy wrote:My money is on:

3) Ken agreed to the pilot to play for time as he doesn't want to do it

Why would he be against motorcycles in bus lanes?

andymiller · Post by **andymiller** » 26 Jan 2008, 9:03pm

toontra wrote:
andymiller wrote:Best to wait for the final report?

Report or no report, we can still discuss the issues as they appear to us from our experience.

My betting is the report in the article was sat on because either:

1) It's methodology was questionable

2) The use of bus lanes by motorcycles could have consequences not envisaged by the authors of the report

... or both.

Or neither.

I don't see any point in discussing a report we none of us have seen.

I expect your prejudices are exactly the same as mine on this issue by the way.

Ben Lovejoy · Post by **Ben Lovejoy** » 27 Jan 2008, 10:58am

toontra wrote:
Ben Lovejoy wrote:My money is on:

3) Ken agreed to the pilot to play for time as he doesn't want to do it

Why would he be against motorcycles in bus lanes?

His antipathy towards motorcycles is well-known in biking circles. Even when he's been forced to say something positive, he's done so reluctantly.

Ben

Kal · Post by **Kal** » 28 Jan 2008, 11:53am

I was really, really angry and came here looking for a representative of CTC to put their hand up to this one

because of this quote
"Cycling campaign group CTC said "noisy" motorcycles travelling at higher speeds would intimidate cyclists, threatening the increase in commuters turning to bicycles."

in this news article

I want to know why motorcycles are too intimidating to share Bus lanes with you when you are already sharing the lane with an 8 tonne Bus!

I have _buried_ friends killed by car users, so having something that would make us so much safer spoken out against in this manner is kind of upsetting.

Evening Std article

Post by Si » 28 Jan 2008, 12:28pm

I was really, really angry and came here looking for a representative of CTC to put their hand up to this one

I refer you to the forum guidelines which you should have read before posting. There is no guarantee that any member of the CTC HO staff will read or respond to any post on the forum - the forum is provided so that members of the club can communicate with each other.

Thus, if you wich comment from a member of the CTC HO staff you should contact them directly, or via your local CTC Councillor.

However, you may well benefit from responces from many cycists who read the fora, both CTC members and not. These views should not necessarily be taken as representative of the CTC.

Kal · Post by **Kal** » 28 Jan 2008, 12:36pm

I did read those. Having a problem with contact details for CTC - penalty of posting from work?

Baring in mind that you are sharing Bus lanes with 8 tonne busses are motorbikes too intimidating for you to share the bus lanes with?

Especially as the 42% drop in collisions included collisions with other two wheeled road users - powered and unpowered.

Comments please?

PW · Post by PW » 28 Jan 2008, 12:47pm

Sharing with a bus is bad enough, adding motorbikes to the mix is worse. The difference in speeds doesn't help either. Keep 'em out.