Biggest Threats to Cyclists?

Johno100

custardy wrote: »

Is it?
I must have missed the memo
If you wish to argue stats
do you have the stats for cyclists deaths by HGV that dont end in prosecution?

No, do you? I have the list of last years London cyclist deaths, if I can find time I may Google '<name> inquest' and see what I come up with.

custardy

Johno100 wrote: »

No, do you? I have the list of last years London cyclist deaths, if I can find time I may Google '<name> inquest' and see what I come up with.

nope,but I can bet its far greater than 7

WiggyDiggyPoo

Johno100 wrote: »

That must have taken some doing, cases from as far back as 2009 and at least one of them was in Scotland. In that time there have been close to 400 cycling fatalities and you have managed to find 7 where an HGV driver was probably at fault.

Johno

Can I ask where do you stand on cycle safety, do you think UK streets are safe for cyclists and other vulnerable road users enough are nothing more needs to be done?

To be specific would you/do you cycle on these streets, and do you feel safe?

Cheers

Johno100

WiggyDiggyPoo wrote: »

Johno

Can I ask where do you stand on cycle safety, do you think UK streets are safe for cyclists and other vulnerable road users enough are nothing more needs to be done?

To be specific would you/do you cycle on these streets, and do you feel safe?

Cheers

No, I don't think cycling on the public roads, particularly busy city streets is safe at all, never will be and I'd never do it. In London specifically with the excellent public transport I can see no good reason to take to a bike.

If individuals want to take their chances on the roads that's up to them, but I wouldn't want it to be encouraged.

custardy

Johno100 wrote: »

No, I don't think cycling on the public roads, particularly busy city streets is safe at all, never will be and I'd never do it. In London specifically with the excellent public transport I can see no good reason to take to a bike.

If individuals want to take their chances on the roads that's up to them, but I wouldn't want it to be encouraged.

Never be safe?
So whats your answer to the congestion?
We can skip the healh benefits for now but we could go onto the economic benefits

hugheskevi

In London specifically with the excellent public transport I can see no good reason to take to a bike.

Not sure I'd describe London as having excellent public transport, I suppose relative to the rest of the country it does, but there are far better examples overseas.

My choices of public transport are:

• bus, which takes at least 90 minutes door-to-door
• train which takes 60 minutes, but which can routinely take longer and on several nights of the year will be completely disrupted and take several hours
• underground (when going into the City), but that involves changing at Balham, onto the underground line which TfL recently advised commuters to avoid and preferably walk instead as you often have to wait for several trains due to overcrowding.

An annual travelcard (rail) would cost me almost £1,500.

Alternatively, I can cycle which will always take 40-45 minutes, and also provides seven and a half hours of exercise per week, compared to standing in crowded and cramped conditions, often with your nose about 5cm from another person on train or tube.

Total cycling expenses, including replacement every few years, are about £300 per year, maximum.

Even if there wasn't a huge cost factor, I'd still prefer to cycle due to the faster journey time, the more pleasant journey and the exercise benefits.

Those are a few good reasons

armyknife

hugheskevi wrote: »

Not sure I'd describe London as having excellent public transport, I suppose relative to the rest of the country it does, but there are far better examples overseas.

My choices of public transport are:

• bus, which takes at least 90 minutes door-to-door
• train which takes 60 minutes, but which can routinely take longer and on several nights of the year will be completely disrupted and take several hours
• underground (when going into the City), but that involves changing at Balham, onto the underground line which TfL recently advised commuters to avoid and preferably walk instead as you often have to wait for several trains due to overcrowding.

An annual travelcard (rail) would cost me almost £1,500.

Alternatively, I can cycle which will always take 40-45 minutes, and also provides seven and a half hours of exercise per week, compared to standing in crowded and cramped conditions, often with your nose about 5cm from another person on train or tube.

Total cycling expenses, including replacement every few years, are about £300 per year, maximum.

Even if there wasn't a huge cost factor, I'd still prefer to cycle due to the faster journey time, the more pleasant journey and the exercise benefits.

Those are a few good reasons

All well and good, but you've missed the major point, you should be getting out of the way for very important/self-important people.

WiggyDiggyPoo

Johno100 wrote: »

No, I don't think cycling on the public roads, particularly busy city streets is safe at all, never will be and I'd never do it. In London specifically with the excellent public transport I can see no good reason to take to a bike.

If individuals want to take their chances on the roads that's up to them, but I wouldn't want it to be encouraged.

Ok, so I think it would be fair to say that you are anti cycling and well frankly a bit of a troll with some of your comments.

I just wondered as you seem to be very negative towards any suggestion at improving matters. Perhaps you are best added to my ignore list

Johno100

WiggyDiggyPoo wrote: »

Ok, so I think it would be fair to say that you are anti cycling and well frankly a bit of a troll with some of your comments.

I just wondered as you seem to be very negative towards any suggestion at improving matters. Perhaps you are best added to my ignore list

Don't agree with the frankly far out cycling evangelists on here so I am a troll?

Johno100

hugheskevi wrote: »

Those are a few good reasons

A good few reasons to either live closer to where you work (but I guess that is down to either house prices or a lifestyle choice) or move out of the overcrowded hell hole that is London.