7-year-old girl died after losing control of bike

[Tangled Metal]

Did someone say it was a 60mph speed limit on that stretch? if so that's a lot of speed to lose in order to be sure of not killing a child should they wobble into your path suddenly. That may sound sick to some but you're potentially talking about a vehicle in a traffic stream at 60mph seeing the child struggling with enough time to safely brake from just under 60mph to what 20mph? 40 mph loss in speed, safely in the distance it takes to see the struggling child, recognise the hazard and safely react with braking. Hmmm! If that is what you would want to happen in that situation I would propose the speed limit was too high. Perhaps 40mph there if it is a dangerous location.

I have ridden by fast roads as a kid with my dad and sister probably at that age or even less. My dad was an experienced cyclist with a healthy awareness of risks. At the risk of sounding heartless, I'm not really, there's many factors coming into affect here. From the quality of bike, road speed limit, design of road such as bend through to road markings, design of mixed use path, experience of the child with the bike/gears/bike use to whether that was even a suitable route for that child.

To say the bike is to blame or even the biggest factor is potentially wrong from the information we have. Remind me what the coroner decided with all the relevant facts presented?

P.S. I feel for the parents. I had nightmares when my young child did something as innocuous as stay at family for the first time. I can't even begin to comprehend how I'd feel in the parent's situation. I've come to understand the idea that it's a parent's worst nightmare to survive their child, especially in tragic circumstances that could have been prevented.

[Mick F]

Did someone say it was a 60mph speed limit on that stretch?

Someone may correct me if I'm wrong, but if there's a pavement alongside/next to the road, it wouldn't be a "National Speed Limit".

The existence of a pavement brings the speed limit down to 40mph max.

[pwa]

Did someone say it was a 60mph speed limit on that stretch? if so that's a lot of speed to lose in order to be sure of not killing a child should they wobble into your path suddenly. That may sound sick to some but you're potentially talking about a vehicle in a traffic stream at 60mph seeing the child struggling with enough time to safely brake from just under 60mph to what 20mph? 40 mph loss in speed, safely in the distance it takes to see the struggling child, recognise the hazard and safely react with braking. Hmmm! If that is what you would want to happen in that situation I would propose the speed limit was too high. Perhaps 40mph there if it is a dangerous location.

I have ridden by fast roads as a kid with my dad and sister probably at that age or even less. My dad was an experienced cyclist with a healthy awareness of risks. At the risk of sounding heartless, I'm not really, there's many factors coming into affect here. From the quality of bike, road speed limit, design of road such as bend through to road markings, design of mixed use path, experience of the child with the bike/gears/bike use to whether that was even a suitable route for that child.

To say the bike is to blame or even the biggest factor is potentially wrong from the information we have. Remind me what the coroner decided with all the relevant facts presented?

P.S. I feel for the parents. I had nightmares when my young child did something as innocuous as stay at family for the first time. I can't even begin to comprehend how I'd feel in the parent's situation. I've come to understand the idea that it's a parent's worst nightmare to survive their child, especially in tragic circumstances that could have been prevented.

+1 to all that. It's a terrible thing to happen.

If cost were not a factor it would be good to see a barrier to prevent wobbly cyclists drifting off the curb. But cost is a factor. Every £ spent on that would be a £ that could have been spent on, say, funding GPs or improving safety outside schools. Non-urban trunk roads will have a fast flow of traffic, hopefully not above the speed limit, and falling onto the road will remain very dangerous. So in practice the most practical thing to do is to encourage adults to ride on the outside of the child, between them and the traffic. It's not something I have previously given a lot of thought to, so I would certainly not point the finger of blame at the adults for not having done that. But it might be something to draw people's attention to in the future.

Mick F, thinking of my own area, there are 60mph limits on roads with pavements running alongside.

[beardy]

The existence of a pavement brings the speed limit down to 40mph max.

I can think of roads (the one I live on) where that isnt the case. It would also be odd that the stretches of road with a pavement should have a lower limit than the stretches without.

Also the pavements alongside some of our 60mph roads are barely wide enough for one bike, let alone two side by side.

[karlt]

Plenty around here as well.

Another factor is how hard children find it to shift gear levers. I've yet to find a twist or trigger grip that isn't right at the limit of what a seven year old is physically strong enough to move. I've had to change all my kids' twist grips to slightly easier levers but they still struggle, especially, as in this case, against the derailleur spring. If you imagine how hard you'd find it to keep control at the same time as you were, e.g. removing a handlebar grip, you get some idea...

There's money in anyone producing either a hub gear cheap enough to fit in the kids' bike market, or a RD with a much weaker spring and less stiff shifters.

[pwa]

The existence of a pavement brings the speed limit down to 40mph max.

I can think of roads (the one I live on) where that isnt the case. It would also be odd that the stretches of road with a pavement should have a lower limit than the stretches without.

Also the pavements alongside some of our 60mph roads are barely wide enough for one bike, let alone two side by side.

Yes, and I suppose with a small child the recommendation there would be not to cycle, as protecting the child by riding alongside is not safe. In this case we are talking about a dedicated cycle route of reasonable width, aren't we?

[beardy]

Meanwhile across parts of Europe children are riding to school on bicycles, even unattended, at ages near to that.

[Mick F]

+1 to all that. It's a terrible thing to happen.

Yes of course. +1 from me too.
Sorry to have changed the subject somewhat.

Mick F, thinking of my own area, there are 60mph limits on roads with pavements running alongside.

Not round here. I struggle to even think of a National Speed Limit road with a pavement next to the road.

All the NSL roads are out of villages and towns. If there are any urban ones, it's non-pedestrian walkway - dual carriageways etc.

From what I understand, you can have a NSL road and walkway, providing the walkway is away from the roadside ie separated by a grass verge etc.

One of the reasons for speed limits, is the presence or possibility of pedestrians.
NSL and pedestrians don't mix.

[Bicycler]

Someone may correct me if I'm wrong, but if there's a pavement alongside/next to the road, it wouldn't be a "National Speed Limit".

The existence of a pavement brings the speed limit down to 40mph max.

I think you mean streetlights. In the absence of other signage streetlights placed at regular intervals of less than 200 yards denote a 30mph speed limit.

From what I understand, you can have a NSL road and walkway, providing the walkway is away from the roadside ie separated by a grass verge etc.

This may be correct in terms of how standards require new roads to be designed (though I haven't looked this up). I'm pretty sure that there is no statutory requirement that all existing roads have to comply with this.

FWIW, I think all busy NSL roads should have at least one pavement. Ideally, also a decent cycleway.

[661-Pete]

Like others on this thread, I think the original title "7-year-old girl killed on BSO" gives out totally the wrong message. Indeed I would go so far as to say, I find it offensive: therefore I shall flag for the moderators to alter it. All those of us who are cyclists, many on well-appointed and superior (and expensive!) bicycles, had to start somewhere. Certainly the child's bike upon which I learnt to keep my balance, was not up to the standard of my present-day mounts.

This is a terrible tragedy but fingering anyone or anything for blame isn't going to help matters. A child may appear to be road-ready, indeed I was from almost the first day I learnt to cycle, but may still have the occasional moment of difficulty. I have fallen off many times in my life since, even as an adult.

With all respect to the grieving family, I hope people aren't put off teaching their children to ride.

[pwa]

+1 to all that. It's a terrible thing to happen.

Yes of course. +1 from me too.
Sorry to have changed the subject somewhat.

Mick F, thinking of my own area, there are 60mph limits on roads with pavements running alongside.

Not round here. I struggle to even think of a National Speed Limit road with a pavement next to the road.

All the NSL roads are out of villages and towns. If there are any urban ones, it's non-pedestrian walkway - dual carriageways etc.

From what I understand, you can have a NSL road and walkway, providing the walkway is away from the roadside ie separated by a grass verge etc.

One of the reasons for speed limits, is the presence or possibility of pedestrians.
NSL and pedestrians don't mix.

I don't know how to do the link, but if you find Primrose Hill, Cowridge (A422?) on Google Maps you will find a 60mph road (quite wide) that becomes 30mph at the bottom as it enters the town. It has a footpath on one side, and it is used. It is only a footpath, though, not a cycle route.

[Flinders]

If cost were not a factor it would be good to see a barrier to prevent wobbly cyclists drifting off the curb. ..........................
Mick F, thinking of my own area, there are 60mph limits on roads with pavements running alongside.

There are certainly cyclepaths on pavements here with 50mph limits on the road.

I honestly can't see how a motorist can drive in such a way as to be able to stop in time for anything or anyone falling onto the road in front of them. You'd have to drive at about 20mph or less whenever there was anyone in sight, that's clearly ridiculous. And remember, drivers also have to watch their speed limit, all other vehicles actually on the roads, crossings, signage, lights. There are limits to what a driver can be expected to see.
If I saw a child wobbling on a bike on the road of course I would slow down or stop - the bike would be in front of me. But on a roadside path to one side, any wobble would have to be a big one to be visible as you gradually came alongside, and it would be pretty extraordinary for the bike to come right off the path in any circumstances. As we all know, if you too low a gear due to a mechanical failure, it can be a very sudden problem and you can hit the deck without any warning at all. I honestly don't see how the driver here could possibly have been at fault unless they were speeding.

As or barriers, I don't like them. If I'm riding on the road, I don't want a barrier to my left if some lorry overtakes me on my right. I'd suggest that there have been more cyclists killed by being squashed between barriers and vehicles than by falling off paths onto the road, however tragic this incident is.

[Brucey]

I think the speed argument is that if the posted speed limit is lower, the chances of a collision of any kind ought to be less, and that should one occur, the chances of survival are increased.

BTW that the poor lass might have been struggling with the gears is no surprise to me; it is very difficult to obtain any kind of gear shifter that small children find easy to operate. A traditional three-speed trigger may be the exception.

cheers

[Bicycler]

Like others on this thread, I think the original title "7-year-old girl killed on BSO" gives out totally the wrong message. Indeed I would go so far as to say, I find it offensive: therefore I shall flag for the moderators to alter it. All those of us who are cyclists, many on well-appointed and superior (and expensive!) bicycles, had to start somewhere. Certainly the child's bike upon which I learnt to keep my balance, was not up to the standard of my present-day mounts.

Just to be clear, the original thread title I objected to so strongly was "7-year-old girl killed by BSO"
But, yes, I totally agree with what you say.

[old_windbag]

just to clarify having paths directly next to 60mph zones. This does happen and there must be no legal aspect to it, I think the confusion may stem from 30mph zones having the street light rule. The link below shows a path often used by cyclists of all ages, its about 4-5ft wide and a 60mph road as you can see from the sign on the lamppost. I can give many more similar examples.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.3199824,-1.5788189,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-frDC2rOuMzvDJeLDuWTtQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

An aspect of the 30mph street light regulation that is silly is when requesting a 30mph road in a rural area ( between villages etc ) where upon the highway planners seem to insist street lights are required. We need to separate speed limits from lighting regulations.