Biggest Threats to Cyclists?

WiggyDiggyPoo

andrewf75 wrote: »

The way round it is to do what they do in Holland, Denmark, Germany and other more forward thinking countries. Design the road space so that bikes have safe lanes and then you will get more people using them for short journeys and less congestion and conflict.

But of course the government will never invest the necessary money because they only think short term.

Segregation does bring its own issues though, firstly most of our cities don't have the type of councils leading them to give that space the room it deserves. In some cities cyclists are either the majority form of transport or the biggest group, yet we often have the least provision.

Secondly I'm of the view that improving junctions, road conditions and driver attitudes is the answer. Segregating just avoids the issue as pointed out that people just need to learn to share better.

Thats not to say all segregation is bad, just its not a giant sticking plaster to fix things (but I dont think you think that either?:))

dawny10 wrote: »

I thought this was interesting
http://www.bath.ac.uk/news/2013/11/26/overtaking-cyclists/

particularly the comparison between the average passing distance in the past and now.

Very interesting.

Now I'm not going to start abandoning my high viz for my night time riding, but it certainly puts into perspective that no matter what we do some drivers will always pass unsafely.

I think its the 'be seen' factor, a reasonable driver will attempt to pass safely so long as they see you. An unreasonable one will not even after they see you.

EDIT

Forgot to add continuing the bike lane theme there's also evidence showing on road cycle lanes can give the illusion of safety and cause vehicles to pass too close. No lane at all resulted in better passing.

Tilt

AndyBSG wrote: »

Unfortunately, as several people on here have pointed out several times, but you seem to be conveniently ignoring, the majority of cyclist v vehicle accidents are overwhelmingly found to be the fault of the vehicle driver.

I don't think I have quoted such comparisons. In any event, although I have noted your previous claim and 'evidence' of this, I would not agree entirely with the findings. For example, near to where I live about 3 years ago, a cyclist was killed late at night riding without lights across a traffic light junction on red. He was hit by a car in which the driver was originally arrested on suspicion of causing death by careless driving. However, when the police discovered that there were no lights fitted to the bike, the driver was exonerated of blame.

There was also the case of a cyclist who was killed by a car on the A11 (I think it was) on an un-lit dual carriageway section. Again, no lights even fitted to the bike and the guy was wearing dark clothing. Again, the car driver was deemed not to be at fault.

AndyBSG wrote: »

That is fact and isn't a random sampling of youtube videos yet your anti cyclist rhetoric continues in complete opposition to these actual statistics.

I am not in opposition with anything, just idiotic cyclists... even though they maybe in a minority. BUT they are out there.

AndyBSG wrote: »

If I based my opinions of the world in general on what was uploaded to youtube then i'd think everyone on the planet was some sort of accident prone, suicidal cretin.

Say what you like about you tube (or any other media for that matter). But the particular channel of Silly Cyclists which boasts over 40 videos each containing 10 clips of poor cycling, is an awful lot of "cretins" don't you think?

Cycrow

and whats your point exactly ?
i've not seen anyone saying there are no silly cyclists in the world.

there are millions of cyclists commuting every day, 400 incidents of silly cycling is a tiny tiny minority

Tilt

custardy wrote: »

No you decided to dip into You tube
I simply showed one from the very roads i cycle on
you seem to think the pass was fine
would you like to answer the point I raised on this acceptable pass you saw

If you are asking my opinion of the actual 'pass' then I will give it.

I noted that the rider with the camera overtook another cyclist earlier in the clip while approaching a hazard (pavement extending outward). I also noted that said cyclist passed closer to the other cyclist than the car passed said cyclist before reaching the traffic lights. The car passed leaving adequate room from the parked vehicle for said cyclist to pass between (I would estimate about 2 metres). In fact the car's o/s wheels were almost on the centre white lines.

My opinion of the driver of the car eating breakfast while driving; stupid.

AndyBSG

Tilt wrote: »

In any event, although I have noted your previous claim and 'evidence' of this, I would not agree entirely with the findings.

Those findings of course being the official Department for Transport report... Which I would think are a bit more reliable than Youtube!

WiggyDiggyPoo

Tilt wrote: »

I don't think I have quoted such comparisons. In any event, although I have noted your previous claim and 'evidence' of this, I would not agree entirely with the findings. For example, near to where I live about 3 years ago, a cyclist was killed late at night riding without lights across a traffic light junction on red. He was hit by a car in which the driver was originally arrested on suspicion of causing death by careless driving. However, when the police discovered that there were no lights fitted to the bike, the driver was exonerated of blame.

There was also the case of a cyclist who was killed by a car on the A11 (I think it was) on an un-lit dual carriageway section. Again, no lights even fitted to the bike and the guy was wearing dark clothing. Again, the car driver was deemed not to be at fault.



I am not in opposition with anything, just idiotic cyclists... even though they maybe in a minority. BUT they are out there.



Say what you like about you tube (or any other media for that matter). But the particular channel of Silly Cyclists which boasts over 40 videos each containing 10 clips of poor cycling, is an awful lot of "cretins" don't you think?

No. Lets put that 400 (+ your 2) in perspective.

SillyCyclists has been in existence for at least 2 years, in that time about 394 million :eek: trips have been made by bicycle in London. I'm not going to work out the percentage that 402 is of 394 million but its low.

Even if the program maker can only see a small % himself of those trips say 0.01% of those journeys thats 3.9 million journeys to witness in 2 years, and he's only seen 400 silly cyclists......

Silly Cyclists includes videos's from other places as far apart as America, Canada, the far east (I think Thailand) and Australia/NZ. So how many cycle journeys are being made every day, safely and with no incident to anyone in all of these countries that are not featuring?

I'm not even sure what your point is anymore as you seem to either make a nonsensical post in response to someone, or just mention Youtube/personal experience.

EDIT - Its 394,000,000 rounded down based on 540,000 journeys per day for 2 years.

(Figures on London based cycle journeys from Department for Transport cicra 2010)

custardy

Tilt wrote: »

If you are asking my opinion of the actual 'pass' then I will give it.

I noted that the rider with the camera overtook another cyclist earlier in the clip while approaching a hazard (pavement extending outward). I also noted that said cyclist passed closer to the other cyclist than the car passed said cyclist before reaching the traffic lights. The car passed leaving adequate room from the parked vehicle for said cyclist to pass between (I would estimate about 2 metres). In fact the car's o/s wheels were almost on the centre white lines.

My opinion of the driver of the car eating breakfast while driving; stupid.

Where was the cyclists escape route if someone opened their door on the parked cars?
I would expect the cyclist to be moving further out had the car not blocked them

Tilt

"Only 400" silly cyclists.... ONLY?? Maybe if the Silly Cyclist channel had more people filming then that figure may even be worse!

Anyway... let's agree to dis-agree as we aren't going to change each other's take on this. Mine is simply that more action should be taken against the minority (about 400) of cyclists who ride recklessly and break the traffic laws thus putting themselves in danger.

I'm bored now so i'm on my bike outta here!

Tilt

custardy wrote: »

Where was the cyclists escape route if someone opened their door on the parked cars?
I would expect the cyclist to be moving further out had the car not blocked them

And no mention of the close pass by the other cyclist then? That was closer than the car!

Byeee.

custardy

Tilt wrote: »

And no mention of the close pass by the other cyclist then? That was closer than the car!

Byeee.

oh are we moving off again?
lets get back to the pass you say is fine(concentrate now)
where would the cyclist go if someone opened their door on the parked cars
You see a perfectly acceptable pass. I dont and have good reason to say it isnt
Here we see the difference between someone who has experience and someone who thinks they know

as for the cyclist pass
you will note he can hold his line and pass the stationary bin(no door zone) without an issue