Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
Mark1978
Posts: 4912
Joined: 17 Jul 2012, 8:47am
Location: Chester-le-Street, County Durham

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by Mark1978 »

mr bajokoses wrote:I find it remarkable that installing some decent facilities is a "pipe dream" but changing driver attitudes and increasing enforcement and punishment are seen as entirely practical, simple solutions.

Can anyone point to an example where this approach has resulted in a high modal share for cycling, or exemplary cycling safety?


There are none. The places which have the biggest amount of people cycling are those where they are able to cycle away from heavy motor traffic.

Agree with the point that it's strange that building infrastructure seems difficult when changing attitudes is easy? It's actually the opposite.
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by Bicycler »

But a complete change of attitude is required in order for a whole network of high quality segregated infrastructure to be built.
User avatar
tank
Posts: 99
Joined: 26 Mar 2013, 12:09pm
Location: home

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by tank »

AndyBSG wrote:- All ASL junctions should have a dedicated set of cyclist signals to give cyclists the head start needed to safely move off ahead of traffic.


As a recumbent rider I find it harder to cycle between two rows of cars to get to the ASL that are local to me as they are just green boxes at the traffic lights. I would like to see a cycle route to the ASL as well.

Cyclist attitudes need to be looked at. There are a few that think they can do what they want which annoys the drivers which then causes the driver to not care as much about those of us that try to be curtious and thoughtful.
Lonely recumbent rider

HP Velotechnik Street Machine GTe
Metabikes Metaphysics
Hase Pino
HPV Velotechnik Scorpion
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by mjr »

RichardPH wrote:Cyclists will always be vulnerable and people differ in what makes them feel safe, my own ideal starts with self-help, it's my life after all.
- I wear something bright whenever possible, drivers are on autopilot for a frightening proportion of their journey, I want them to register my presence.
- Do what a cyclist is expected to do, be where they are expected to be, the driver then instinctively knows what I am. This means riding towards the LHS of the road, whatever, this means a safe distance from the kerb to allow countersteer room, but not in the middle of the lane. Drivers could easily misjudge my speed assuming I'm a motor scooter etc if I'm not where they expect me to be.

Is that helping oneself?

There's little evidence that bright colours work in all situations (reflectives are good at night and other than that, it seems best to contrast with your surroundings according to links in http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... luorescent) and drivers expect you to "get off the f***ing road" and use the pavement, legal or not. If the road is narrow, taking the middle of the lane is much better than letting any driver think that they can overtake.

I can't find the accident stats right now but I'm pretty sure that misjudging speed when approaching from behind isn't a widespread accident cause. The top crash types are all about junctions and drivers don't look by the kerb, so again taking the middle of the lane is better.

I agree with most of the points about quiet lanes, bike lanes and training, but I think the above actions are one useless and one dangerous.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by mjr »

Psamathe wrote:The more such responsibilities are left to politicians the more frustrated cyclists will be through lack of action.

I'm with you on some direct action, but we also need to lobby the politicians because they control tax money that should be spent on this (£10 per person per annum(year) according to the Get Britain Cycling report) and right now, they're spending less than £2pppa on bikes in most places. Cars get much more than that: our local council's budget shows £17pppa just on subsidising car parks - this situation is backwards, crazy and lethal!
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
User avatar
TrevA
Posts: 3551
Joined: 1 Jun 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Nottingham

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by TrevA »

Mark1978 wrote: There are none. The places which have the biggest amount of people cycling are those where they are able to cycle away from heavy motor traffic.



What about London? You see more people cycling there than in most cities, but they're mainly on-road, not on seperate cycle lanes.

The incentive to cycle in London is that it's by far the cheapest and often the quickest way to get around.

My son and his GF live in east London. He cycles to work, she catches the tube. He can get to work (9 miles) in 30 minutes. She takes 40 mins for a shorter commute, has to stand all the way in and pays £1500 a year for her Oyster card.
Sherwood CC and Notts CTC.
A cart horse trapped in the body of a man.
http://www.jogler2009.blogspot.com
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by Bicycler »

TrevA wrote:
Mark1978 wrote: There are none. The places which have the biggest amount of people cycling are those where they are able to cycle away from heavy motor traffic.



What about London? You see more people cycling there than in most cities, but they're mainly on-road, not on seperate cycle lanes.

The incentive to cycle in London is that it's by far the cheapest and often the quickest way to get around.

Yep, the Great British public did not stop cycling because traffic, they stopped cycling because they got cars and those cars were more convenient to use than their bicycles. Long term strategies to encourage greater cycling would have to look at discouraging motor vehicle use or prioritising cycle travel. But I think we're getting away from the OP, which asked how to improve safety of existing cyclists.
AlaninWales
Posts: 1626
Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 1:47pm

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by AlaninWales »

TrevA wrote:
Mark1978 wrote: There are none. The places which have the biggest amount of people cycling are those where they are able to cycle away from heavy motor traffic.



What about London? You see more people cycling there than in most cities, but they're mainly on-road, not on seperate cycle lanes.

The incentive to cycle in London is that it's by far the cheapest and often the quickest way to get around.

My son and his GF live in east London. He cycles to work, she catches the tube. He can get to work (9 miles) in 30 minutes. She takes 40 mins for a shorter commute, has to stand all the way in and pays £1500 a year for her Oyster card.

The point to take from that is surely that whilst he cycles, she pays £1500 pa to avoid cycling.
I cycled in London and surrounds from 12 to 40+; it is certainly the quickest way to get around and often the cheapest. It is possible for an assertive rider to cope with conditions there (I still do visit occasionally, but pick my times so I don't need to be so aggressive to survive), but whilst cycling in London has increased, cycling is still dominated there by mostly young assertive males (with some mostly young, assertive females) and cannot be said to represent the broader population.
If separate, safe and direct lanes were provided then the potential for cycling in London is huge.
Please read and action before end of Friday: http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by mjr »

Bicycler wrote:Yep, the Great British public did not stop cycling because traffic, they stopped cycling because they got cars and those cars were more convenient to use than their bicycles. Long term strategies to encourage greater cycling would have to look at discouraging motor vehicle use or prioritising cycle travel. But I think we're getting away from the OP, which asked how to improve safety of existing cyclists.

I'm beginning to wonder if we should replace most of this thread with links to David Hembrow:
David Hembrow wrote:Right up through the 1980s and early 1990s, The Netherlands had slightly higher car ownership than the UK, which was to be expected as cars were more easily affordable in The Netherlands than in the UK

You may still be right that most of the UK stopped cycling because cars were made relatively more convenient while UK planners marginalised walking and cycling, but there's little need to make car use less convenient now. It's already pretty awful, with hundreds of pounds spent fuelling, parking and maintaining them and days spent in queues or chasing around after repairs and replacements. In general, it's simply not possible to build our way out of congestion - it's like dieting by loosening your belt - and we need to help people realise it... and I'm writing this with a busy single-carriageway stretch of the A10 outside my window, so you might think I'd be leading the calls for building bypasses!

The main thing we need is to restore cycling's convenience! About the only way that car use might very occasionally need to be made less convenient is to take back some of the extra space in constrained streets that they were given in error and return it to walking and cycling. Far from getting away from the OP, protected space for cycling is a key tool in improving safety of existing cyclists - but it's only one point in the http://www.space4cycling.org toolbox that we need.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Mark1978
Posts: 4912
Joined: 17 Jul 2012, 8:47am
Location: Chester-le-Street, County Durham

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by Mark1978 »

I certainly think we reached a tipping point in around the late 80's where car usage was just about manageable. At that point we could have sought stop traffic growth by looking at other means, such as cycle lanes, but also tram systems, trains etc etc. But instead we chose to ever expand the road infrastructure, let out of town car dependent developments spring up, build estates where the only realistic way of getting in and out was by car.

The Netherlands might have taken 40 years but it's even worse for the UK as we have 40 years of damage to undo first and that's assuming there is a will to change.
Elizabeth_S
Posts: 254
Joined: 27 May 2013, 3:18pm
Location: somewhere

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by Elizabeth_S »

Attitude mainly, you can have as many laws as you want, but if the attitude isn't there then they are disregarded. This entire 'car is king' thing needs to go and I think the only way is strict liability and adding a cycling section to the driving test, and changing attitudes towards killing with a car or lorry. I mean if someone hits you with a piece of metal it is murder, manslaughter or assault, but turn that metal into a car and its okay to kill someone and that is very wrong. The 'road tax' issue make car drivers feel that they pay so they have more rights so that has to be reformulated so that it is clear what it is and what it is for.
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by Psamathe »

Bicycler wrote:Yep, the Great British public did not stop cycling because traffic, they stopped cycling because they got cars and those cars were more convenient to use than their bicycles. Long term strategies to encourage greater cycling would have to look at discouraging motor vehicle use or prioritising cycle travel. But I think we're getting away from the OP, which asked how to improve safety of existing cyclists.


And continuing that off-topic direction:
I believe that the current economic situation in the UK is already providing a massive incentive for people to adopt cycling. As disposable incomes are squeezed (given inflation being somewhat higher than wage/income growth), and the cost of fuel is only going to increase in the longer term, so many who can will take to cycling.

I was told (so I can quote any reference sources) that there are already signs that some two car families are switching to one car + bike and one partner is cycling to work. Of course this is not for everybody but the financial savings from going two cars to one go far beyond the fuel savings.

I believe it is the perfect time for a push for more and better cycling facilities and (to move towards the thread topic), more cyclists, better facilities, etc. will improve safety. After all, dedicated cycle paths are a lot cheaper to construct than roads, cheaper to maintain, don't pollute the atmosphere (EU regs here - which London has "problems" meeting), don't take loads of space when left through the day .... why can't out politicians see this ?

Ian
AndyBSG
Posts: 382
Joined: 10 Jul 2013, 11:16am

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by AndyBSG »

Psamathe wrote:I believe that the current economic situation in the UK is already providing a massive incentive for people to adopt cycling.


I spend a LOT more money on my bike and cycling than I do on my car!
andrewk
Posts: 354
Joined: 20 May 2011, 3:19pm
Location: SW London

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by andrewk »

Improve conditions for cycling but not by making conditions worse for motorists. I am strongly against reduced speed limits, chicanes (so called traffic calming measures) and other anti car measures.
This isn't a zero sum game. It is possible to improve the lot of cyclists without bashing the motorist. The cycling lobbyists who are bent on bashing the motorist and introducing anti car policies are IMO misguided and fuel antagonism between the two. A consensus to improve conditions for cycling will not be achieved if one sets out to alienate the majority.
It is possible to introduce measures that are pro car and pro cycling, eg. Segregated cycle lanes, restrictions on HGVs in urban areas. Education and enforcement though never popular is IMO needed both for motorists and cyclists.
Mark1978
Posts: 4912
Joined: 17 Jul 2012, 8:47am
Location: Chester-le-Street, County Durham

Re: Cycling Safety - What Needs To Change?

Post by Mark1978 »

I used to agree with that viewpoint, but I'm increasingly coming around to the view that if you want proper cycling facilities which are going to be used by the masses, you absolutely cannot take the approach, like most local authorities do, that it must not affect car traffic in any way shape or form. If cycling is to become ingrained in society we have to redistribute the road space away from being dominated by the car, to do that will often mean removing parking, making lanes narrower, removing lanes, restricting access etc.
Post Reply