Biggest Threats to Cyclists?

Marco_Panettone

Avoriaz wrote: »

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.

That'll almost certainly lead to their death....

Useless1000

All of the people wanting to ban trucks from London , I should think the hgv drivers would like that to. They do not drive in to London out of choice, most would love to avoid it full stop. As for night deliveries , what about the people who live on the routes that the trucks would take? Do they not deserve a good nights sleep.

Marco_Panettone

Useless1000 wrote: »

All of the people wanting to ban trucks from London , I should think the hgv drivers would like that to. They do not drive in to London out of choice, most would love to avoid it full stop. As for night deliveries , what about the people who live on the routes that the trucks would take? Do they not deserve a good nights sleep.

If it stops people dying you can drive lorries past my house all night long.

Useless1000

I am lucky and the closest I ever get to London is the m25 so what ever they do would not effect me, I just was thinking of the people living there.

custardy

Useless1000 wrote: »

I am lucky and the closest I ever get to London is the m25 so what ever they do would not effect me, I just was thinking of the people living there.

A little naive
do you think if haulers costs rise,the costs stop in Londinum?

Useless1000

Was talking about being disturbed by night deliveries , not the cost in money.

hugheskevi

Was musing today about what some folk think living in London is like. Starting with the initial comment:

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

To which I replied about one of my transport options:

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

Which later in the thread was commented upon:

I was replying to a poster in London and his/hers horrendous commute.

That 60 minute door-to-door journey breaks down as 10 minute walk to train station, 22 minute train ride (most of time seats available) and 15 minute walk to work at the other end (Tube is an option, but is barely faster and will be crowded). Add in a usual 5-10 minute delay of train and it usually takes the best part of 60 minutes. Journey home is less pleasant, and can often be crowded, but no more than any other train and I'm only on it for 20-25 minutes.

Many people have far less pleasant commutes over much further distances, facing longer delays with nil chance of a seat. Many people commute from Portsmouth, Southampton, Oxford and Cambridge and it was those people I always equated with horrendous commutes.

But if my commute is 'horrendous' just who is it that is benefiting from London's 'excellent public transport?'

carlosthejackal666

Le73Uq86Uv wrote: »

The biggest threat to cyclists !

CYCLISTS

If there is a Cycle path USE IT.

Only valid if you're travelling at 15mph or less. Most road cyclists travel in excess of that, so it's inappropriate to use them. That's why they're called ROAD bikes. And as has already been stated, cyclists are perfectly entitled to use the public highway. There's a reason it's called the public highway.

Mids_Costcutter

Altarf wrote: »

1. Cheaper.
2. England is small (Scotland and Wales don't matter as damn all people live there to deliver things to), Europe is big.

It also depends on how you measure the stats. Are you saying that 33% of EU freight never touches a truck? Or that 33% of the mileage is done on rail and 67% on road.?

HGVs on trunk roads are irrelevant for this issue, and if you still have HGVs delivering from a rail freight terminal into the nearby town, you still have the squashing cyclist problem.

The statistics (from the EU Transport in Figures Statistical Pocketbook 2013) are for the percentage of tonne km by road by national hauliers. So that's not to say that a crate of beer being transported to the town where I live will be moved by just one mode of transport, it might be rail and road. Some freight will also be moved by inland waterways, pipelines, sea and air, as well as rail.

Regarding the cyclist lorry collision problem (elegantly put in your description by the way), fewer lorries travelling shorter distances means fewer opportunities for a collision but of course the problem is not eliminated completely.

Who is road freight cheaper for? Not for the economy as a whole when all the external costs are taken into account. A freight train can typically take 50 lorry journeys off the road and is far more energy efficient, but yes road transport will generally still be needed for the final (short) leg.

The last time I looked at my atlas England, Scotland and Wales are all part of Europe.

Bella73

I just wish ALL people choosing to cycle would wear high vis gear and have lights when appropriate but then I know lots of dumb drivers who don't use lights either. Never understood the mentality...do these people have a death wish?

I've just bought a bike (hoping it get a but fitter..been 20 years since my last bike eek!) but before I go out am looking to buy lights and a hi vis vest and only intend to cycle on trails (will avoid roads) and things but feel for my safety it's important I can be seen.