snibgo wrote:RRCGB 2012 numbers:
399 pedestrians hit by cycles
of which 2 were killed and 82 were seriously injured.
Of the deaths about one in four in on the footway or verge and three out of four are in the roadway.
Figures for pedestrians injured by cyclists?
Re: Figures for pedestrians injured by cyclists?
Of the deaths about one in four in on the footway or verge and three out of four are in the roadway.
Re: Figures for pedestrians injured by cyclists?
What I'd be interested to know is the frequency of cyclists KSI in ped/cyclist collisions. There are no published stats on this that I can find, and I think I have found the reason why. I looked at the national raw data on road accidents (which you can download), but there is no way of discerning it from that data. The problem is that the database only mentions the presence of a pedestrian in an accident if they are recorded as one of the injured. So ped/cyclist accidents appear in the database as cyclist-only accidents unless there was a sufficiently serious injury to the ped for it to be recorded.
Re: Figures for pedestrians injured by cyclists?
iviehoff wrote:What I'd be interested to know is the frequency of cyclists KSI in ped/cyclist collisions. There are no published stats on this that I can find, and I think I have found the reason why. I looked at the national raw data on road accidents (which you can download), but there is no way of discerning it from that data. The problem is that the database only mentions the presence of a pedestrian in an accident if they are recorded as one of the injured. So ped/cyclist accidents appear in the database as cyclist-only accidents unless there was a sufficiently serious injury to the ped for it to be recorded.
I think its low. There was a bit of German research that found that typically the cyclist would slide and roll in such a collision gaining minor injuries while the pedestrian typically dropped like a sack of spuds, fatally hitting their head on the pavement. But since this isn't the appropriate fireproof section of the forum I won't mention the conclusion one might draw from that
-
Roger Geffen
- Posts: 10
- Joined: 7 Dec 2012, 3:22pm
Re: Figures for pedestrians injured by cyclists?
Iviehoff mentioned a CTC paper with relevant stats. There are actually 3 briefings that are relevant here:
Cyclists and pedestrians: http://www.ctc.org.uk/campaigning/views ... edestrians
(Includes comparisons of the risk posed to pedestrians by cyclists and motor vehicle drivers respectively)
Cycling and the law: http://www.ctc.org.uk/campaigning/views ... ur-and-law
(Includes comparisons of the risks due to red light jumping and pavement use, by cyclists and drivers respectively)
10 common questions about cycling: http://www.ctc.org.uk/article/campaigns ... ut-cycling
(Deals with all the common anti-cycling arguments, including the arguments that cyclists should be tested, licenced, made to wear helmets and hi-viz etc, as well as the old chestnuts of pavements and red lights).
The full set of CTC campaigns briefings (well, those we've published to date - there are more still to come!) can be accessed from: http://www.ctc.org.uk/campaignsbriefings.
A few points to pick out that haven't been mentioned so far:
* In London, cyclists account for 2% of pedestrians injured by red light jumping and 4% of pedestrian injuries on pavements. The other 98% and 96% respectively involved motor vehicles.
* There were 4 pedestrians killed by cyclists on pavements or verges during the whole of the last decade (2000-10). Over that period, motor vehicles on pavements /verges killed an average of 40 per year, almost one a week.
[References for both these points are in CTC's "Cycling and the law" briefing - link above.]
* It is true that, per mile travelled by cycle and by car, the rate of involvement of cycles in pedestrian injuries is not that much lower than for cars. However the latter tend to be more serious. I'm afraid can't remember the numbers but, from memory, the average length of a hospital stay for a pedestrian injured by a motor vehicle was c50% longer than one injured by a cycle. And of course the former are far more numerous too.
Roger Geffen
Campaigns & Policy Director, CTC
Cyclists and pedestrians: http://www.ctc.org.uk/campaigning/views ... edestrians
(Includes comparisons of the risk posed to pedestrians by cyclists and motor vehicle drivers respectively)
Cycling and the law: http://www.ctc.org.uk/campaigning/views ... ur-and-law
(Includes comparisons of the risks due to red light jumping and pavement use, by cyclists and drivers respectively)
10 common questions about cycling: http://www.ctc.org.uk/article/campaigns ... ut-cycling
(Deals with all the common anti-cycling arguments, including the arguments that cyclists should be tested, licenced, made to wear helmets and hi-viz etc, as well as the old chestnuts of pavements and red lights).
The full set of CTC campaigns briefings (well, those we've published to date - there are more still to come!) can be accessed from: http://www.ctc.org.uk/campaignsbriefings.
A few points to pick out that haven't been mentioned so far:
* In London, cyclists account for 2% of pedestrians injured by red light jumping and 4% of pedestrian injuries on pavements. The other 98% and 96% respectively involved motor vehicles.
* There were 4 pedestrians killed by cyclists on pavements or verges during the whole of the last decade (2000-10). Over that period, motor vehicles on pavements /verges killed an average of 40 per year, almost one a week.
[References for both these points are in CTC's "Cycling and the law" briefing - link above.]
* It is true that, per mile travelled by cycle and by car, the rate of involvement of cycles in pedestrian injuries is not that much lower than for cars. However the latter tend to be more serious. I'm afraid can't remember the numbers but, from memory, the average length of a hospital stay for a pedestrian injured by a motor vehicle was c50% longer than one injured by a cycle. And of course the former are far more numerous too.
Roger Geffen
Campaigns & Policy Director, CTC