Biggest Threats to Cyclists?

Marco_Panettone

Le73Uq86Uv wrote: »

The biggest threat to cyclists !

CYCLISTS

If there is a Cycle path USE IT.

What makes you think cycle paths are safe?

There are plenty of roads in this country, but there is a varying degree of quality. Some are narrow, twisty, bumpy, overgrown, dark and only fit for farm vehicles, whereas others are nice straight well-lit smooth tarmac.

Cycle paths are the same. Some are great (sadly a rarity), others are dangerously bad. Do really think riders would actively choose the worse option?

AlecEiffel

Marco_Panettone wrote: »

What makes you think cycle paths are safe?

There are plenty of roads in this country, but there is a varying degree of quality. Some are narrow, twisty, bumpy, overgrown, dark and only fit for farm vehicles, whereas others are nice straight well-lit smooth tarmac.

Cycle paths are the same. Some are great (sadly a rarity), others are dangerously bad. Do really think riders would actively choose the worse option?

Where I live cyclists do use the worse option. There is a very busy stretch of road that cyclists regularly use and cycle two abreast on. Next to it but separated is a cycle path. It is in good condition, I use it myself so know. It is clear, smooth, free of obstructions and foliage etc, and not overcrowded, yet regularly I have to negotiate cyclists on the road during rush hour, two abreast.

WiggyDiggyPoo

bugslet wrote: »

......

Probably is supermarkets Wiggy. I did read that 25% of LGVs are on for supermarkets directly or indirectly - not my sector, but I did a 'guess' once as I ambled along a motorway and reckon it's about right.

.....

Apoligies for the brutal edit (I did read the rest promise ) but this is the bit I think will be important to any banning of LGVs from inner cities.

How many large supermarkets vs 'Metro/Express' stores do we have in inner cities (hypothetical question).

Because if 25% of the LGV traffic in cities is for these smaller supermarkets, why can't such vehicles be replaced with smaller trucks?

If all the other deliveries being made in LGVs are then non food, there is no time requirement on having them deliver at certain times e.g. that sofa company can have its wares arrive at 0300 when the roads are quiet.

Its not an approach that can work everywhere, but no solution needs to be one size fits all.

On a bit of tangent, actually a heck of a one, it also makes a case for having more local mayor's offices like Johnson's - if more places were able to locally manage their roads directly rather than relying on whichever government is in power to tell them what to do. We might get some more novel solutions*

*Actually in hindsight after reading that I'm pretty sure local councils could act as they wish in regards to traffic management, they just don't!

bugslet

There's no reason why a lot of vehicles can't be replaced by smaller vehicles. However what you factor in is, one truck carrying say 24 pallets will be replaced by 24 vans, or 3 7.5 ton lorries, providing that the weight permits. So the questions are, do you want a higher volume of smaller traffic and do you want to pay more?

A lot of loads are divisable, complete finger in the air guess, but a comfortable 75% of LGVs loads could be moved into smaller vehicles I would imagine.

Yes the sofa place could have people accept at 3 in the morning, but I think the main problem with that is that it means a lot of people work during the night, who currently don't. As I say, not my sector, but as a small company, I get to sort out the problems, which means my sleep would be rather interrupted or you start paying a planner if you are a larger company.

How about everyone that cycles, works at night and then the LGVs can have more space during the day.:rotfl:(Please no-one lose their sense of humour there)

Edit away!;)

Marco_Panettone

The LGV ban works in Paris (0 cycling deaths in 2012) - there's no reason a rush-hour ban can't work in London. This is likely to make it more dangerous for me personally (due to the hours I work), but it'll make it safer for the majority - and that's more important.

bugslet

I'm wondering Marco, if there is something else to the Paris experience? There are deaths from other vehicles as well, banning LGVs, either rush hour or through the day, would have a significant and welcome effect on the death and injury toll.

Paris is coming up with 0 cyclists dead, that means that buses and cars are not involved in a collision either - it just made me wonder what Paris does in addition to an LGV ban to make the city safer? ( Or am I mis-reading something and it's 0 by LGVs?)

Marco_Panettone

According to the BBC it was 0 fatalities: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-24999302

London (this year) has seen 14 deaths in total, 9 involving HGVs, despite the fact that these vehicles make up a small percentage of traffic (4% in 2010). Figure 3: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/traffic-note-1-traffic-levels-in-greater-london-2010.pdf

RichardD1970

Drivers like this,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-25000788

Regardless of fault her actions after the event are despicable and strangely most of the media coverage is about her tweet rather than the incident.

Found guilty of failing to stop after an accident and failing to report it, and lost her job.

This bit is just unbelievable

Way refused to comment as she left court, saying she had signed an exclusive television deal.

Norman_Castle

Le73Uq86Uv wrote: »

The biggest threat to cyclists !

CYCLISTS

If there is a Cycle path USE IT.

Arrogant advice from behind a windscreen.

Avoriaz

Le73Uq86Uv wrote: »

The biggest threat to cyclists !

CYCLISTS

If there is a Cycle path USE IT.

I try, I really try but, on my ride earlier today, the wide shared pedestrian and cyclist path with a clearly marked side for cyclists, was blocked by crowds of students, school kids and other pedestrians walking in bunches 6 or 8 abreast, blocking both pedestrian and cycle lanes completely.

Most of them are either wearing headphones or walking head down focusing on their mobile phones, or both, and are mostly oblivious to the world about them and don't even notice a cyclist approaching them from the front, let alone the rear.