[Closed] Road - musings on danger

@trail_rat, i know a few people hit, a few killed. I also know that i am more likely to die slipping over in the shower. It is about actually thinking about what is and is not safe, about what is an acceptable risk.

Given that this s the case: how many people do you know who have been killed in showers?

" accept that, but as i say you have to keep it in perspective. you mention working off shore, i assume North Sea/Shetlands etc oil rigs,do you think superpuma's crash therefore must not use? "

up until the last one i was happy to accept that risk - i have opinions on that i wont be expressing on a public forum but suffice to say im thankful i dont work in the north sea

sikorsky s76's where i work

Two things made me get into MTB. Like the OP I was becoming increasingly concerned about my safety on Surrey roads - crap surfaces, narrow lanes and women continuing their multitasking behaviour while inside their 4x4s and white van men. The second was the cost of triathlons. Wanted to switch to ultra maras and adventure racing. Needed to up the MTB skiis for the latter.

Trouble is now, every time I come back from MTBing I have either broken bits of myself or my bike!!!! I miss road riding thought but oddly when I had to do a road stretch last Friday afternoon on a XC MTB ride and narrowly escaped being mashed by a car I remembered why I know spend 99% of my time off road.

Given that this s the case: how many people do you know who have been killed in showers?

i know a couple of people who died on the toilet, and thankfully no deaths but a few broken bones from baths.

The real point is that you have to divorce personal opinion from reality. The repeated comments that a helmet saved my life is the prime example of this, you don't have a clue whether the helmet actually did anything, statistically they may help but there is no firm evidence that the pros outway the cons. Cycling is safe, but if you read the reports you get a biased opinion. The real issue is not safety but that on many roads it is unpleasant, being buzzed by a car doing 60 is not enjoyable, but assuming the car has given you a few feet, most do, it is safe.

No risks in MTB? Really?

I'd be interested in knowing the actual risk of death for various 'extreme' activities vs. going for a road ride. I'd assume you're more likely to die during an hour of road biking than you are during an hour of mountain biking, on-piste skiing or diving, but climbing, paragliding and motorcycling would all have more fatalities per hour

I'm sure I'm more likely to break a bone on my mountain bike but it's dying I'm particularly worried about

I'm sure I'm more likely to break a bone on my mountain bike but it's dying I'm particularly worried about

I've seen more near death experiences on the roads than offroad.

My problem is I've had far too many bad crashes off road, and only one case of being blown into a ditch by the the wind off a passing car almost 10 years ago.

Ridden on the road for 30 years including commutes of various lengths in 3 very different areas; central London, rural Wiltshire and suburbia. I've been properly knocked off once in that time and had maybe a dozen incidents that were genuinely close calls.

Once you get used to the feeling of being in traffic you realise that many of what you initially think of as close calls aren't really all that close at all, at least not dangerously so.

The real point is that you have to divorce personal opinion from reality.

...

Cycling is safe

That's a personal opinion right there.

Cycling will become safer the more people riding there are and the more we fight people who drive without due consideration for others.

Giving up and riding an MTB doesn't really help make cycling any safer...

Right now I think we're part-way through the necessary transformation. Lots more people are riding which has 2 short-term implications:
a) the new riders are, by definition, inexperienced and so more likely to put themselves in danger (e.g. not riding primary position)
b) drivers are having to get used to looking properly for people on bikes, and drive with more care than they used to

Over time, the riders' experience should improve, as should general driver behaviour and acceptance of the legal rights of people to ride unharrassed... but this culture change will not come overnight...

I've ridden both the A4074 Reading to Oxford and the North Deeside, fairly regularly albeit mostly on weekends for both, and neither are mega nice in places, but aren't that bad. Plus you need to pick the stretch as some bits of both are fine and others not IMO.

Is road cycling dangerous, well it can be, but so can everything. IMO the benefits far outweigh the risks. There are far more dangerous places and things to do, horse riding, climbing, working on building sites, ships, oil rigs etc. etc.

That's a personal opinion right there.

nope, statistically cycling is safe, not as safe as flying granted, but pretty safe.

Well said Brooess, not really done much road riding in the last 25yrs, but looking forward to cycle commuting once I have moved into my new house, that said I will be trying to avoid the "worst" roads but guess I aught to be putting pen to paper to the powers that be to improve the woefully inadequate cycling facilities that are provided.

Safe isn't a statistical measure, what you mean is safe enough for you (which is obviously a personal opinion), or a comparative term like less safe than flying but safer than motorcycling.

No risks in MTB? Really?

The absolutely crucial difference is that the risks in MTB are my call, my responsibility. If I want to do a gap jump over flaming lava*, that's up to me. On the road, I'm at the mercy of utter muppets.
*NB I've never done a gap jump.

pypdjl - Member
Safe isn't a statistical measure, what you mean is safe enough for you (which is obviously a personal opinion), or a comparative term like less safe than flying but safer than motorcycling.

true, but if we set the base line as "is walking safe," then cycling is safe. If you think walking is dangerous then i guess cycling isn't for you. Life is about judgements but to say that cycling is dangerous is wrong, unless you regard getting out of bed or going to the toilet as dangerous.

I have road raced for years, used to TT a lot and have MTB's for more years than I like to think about!

TTing undoubtedly felt the most dangerous and probably statistically is the most dangerous. The one with the most injuries (from me and my weekend warrior mates) is MTBing - a long list of broken bones, even a suspected (but thankfully not) broken spine on a stupid fall from one rider on a recent ride. However road cycling is not like MTB where it's usually your own mistake that causes the injury but faith in others that is the worry some part. I road ride on quieter roads usually in groups and this feels quite safe compared to MTBing.

Not up to date but interesting all the same:

[url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8412891.stm ]BBC[/url]

woefully inadequate cycling facilities that are provided

What facilities do you mean? If you're talking about separate cycle lanes then what's the point when there's already a perfectly adequate road network out there to get you from A to B? Yes it can be improved by better design, and some roads (fast trunk roads basically) warrant a cycle only lane separating the bikes from the traffic, but in general the vast majority of the roads are perfectly ok to ride on safely. If you take cyclists off the roads, you're just reinforcing the reactionary attitudes of some drivers that cyclists are a nuisance and should be removed from the roads.

Life is about judgements but to say that cycling is dangerous is wrong

You keep contradicting yourself within the same post!

What facilities do you mean?

The road concerned runs between two large towns 15miles apart & has a pretty bad safety record, most people would consider cycling at rush hour especially through winter as fairly suicidal - however there are some quite good shared use paths that I am more than happy to use in preference to the road, but they frequently stop & cross the road & come to a halt in the middle of nowhere & it wouldn't take too much expense or imagination to improve them considerably.

i've always wanted a road bike and think it looks great fun but i cant think of anything worse than trying to ride on UK roads.

You keep contradicting yourself within the same post!

no contradictions, cycling is safe by any relevant comparative measure. There are times and places where it is unpleasant, but that does not mean dangerous.

i cant think of anything worse than trying to ride on UK roads

Are you really sure?

i've always wanted a road bike and think it looks great fun but i cant think of anything worse than trying to ride on UK roads.

pick different roads then, UK roads are on the safe, you will get the odd **** in car but the likelyhood of having an accident is basically no greater than the likelyhood of having an accident walking to the shop.

There are roads that are unpleasant and no fun to ride, but there are plenty of roads where cars are few and you can get away from it all.

Most of the risk is a result of cyclists not being assertive, car drivers doing things that are "probably" ok, control the road, you have every right to be there, infact more right, if it isn't safe for a car to pass don't give them the option. Do not give them enough room to go past.

The problem is that the 'cycling is safe' lobby rely on the stats, especially if you choose the stat most likely to reduce the risk (By time spent rather than distance travelled for example). Unfortunately I have reservations about how accurate the stats are. For a start, if you stumble out of a bar drunk & get knocked over then that counts as a 'pedestrian death' even if you have only walked 10 feet. Then there is the methodology of how they calculate cycle use. Given that the majority of people do not carry a means of finding out how far they have gone, how accurate can they really be? You may call it anecdote, but I've done over 70,00 largely road miles over the past few years and I can fuly understand why people might see it as unsafe. I can't remember the last time I had an incident as a pedestrian comparable to things which happen on a weekly basis on the bike. As mucgh as I would like it not to be so, road riding presents risks that other forms of transport don't.

no contradictions, cycling is safe by any relevant comparative measure.

You are back to confusing personal opinion with objective reality. Safe is a matter of opinion. I cycle to work every day on the roads for what it's worth.

Most of the risk is a result of cyclists not being assertive, car drivers doing things that are "probably" ok, control the road, you have every right to be there, infact more right, if it isn't safe for a car to pass don't give them the option. Do not give them enough room to go past.

Safe is a matter of opinion

Really? People may not feel safe toproping at the climbing wall or riding a rollercoaster. That doesn't mean that those activities are not safe.

It seems road riding requires a fatalism or blind faith I just don't have.

It requires pessimism. Expect every car you see to do the wrong thing and hit you. Don't just ride past T junctions if there's a car there or approaching - cover your brakes and get ready to swerve or bail. That includes checking to see if there's a car coming the other way.

Then study your route, as mentioned. There are certain roads I won't cycle, and they aren't necessarily the busy ones. The A4 between Newbury and Reading is horribly busy, but I rode it a lot (a few years back) and felt safe. It's remarkably wide single carriageway so you have masses of room, and there's so much traffic no-one's trying to break records, they just trundle along at lorry speed behaving nicely.

On the other hand, the A466 north of Chepstow through Tintern always makes me scared despite being a beautiful country road. It has slow scenery gawpers and 'drivers' who want to get ahead and overtake, and several long tight corners with very little sight. And walls and drops close to the road too with no bailout.

I'll be cycling in London next week, where I feel fairly safe, because whilst it's busy everyone is watching what they are doing (they have to) and I have plenty of choice of route. And everyone is well used to seeing and catering for cyclists.

all you have to worry about are the rare ocassions when a car mounts the pavement.

The likelyhood of being hit and killed by a car is far higher than a cyclist hitting and killing you on the pavement. And as we all know cyclists are always running red lights and riding on the pavement....

if it isn't safe for a car to pass don't give them the option. Do not give them enough room to go past.

When people at work ask me advice on cycling on the roads, this is the main thing I tell them. However there is a problem in that their instant reaction is 'well that's alright for you as you go really fast', and they have a point. Taking the lane is much easier and less intimidating if you're doing 20mph+, and I'm not sure I'd fancy cycling in the middle of a country lane or busy urban road at 10 - 15mph.

The likelyhood of being hit and killed by a car is far higher than a cyclist hitting and killing you on the pavement

Ummmm. In the context of this discussion. This has what to do with the price of fish?

perception versus reality.

I was wrong, cycling is actually safer than walking...

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/sep/28/road-deaths-great-britain-data ]http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/sep/28/road-deaths-great-britain-data[/url]

I was wrong, cycling is actually safer than walking...

Seems I'm not alone then.

The lorry driver stated he overtook because 'I'd been following for some time and the cyclist hadn't moved over to let me pass' he got driving without undue care and attention and 6 points for choosing to nearly kill me rather than do an emergency stop.

The mirror brush was a youf texting - no proof but that's all it could have been. Primary and I'd be dead. Police did nothing.

I do all the quiet roads bit but unless you want to get bored out of your mind on the same loop you need to link them with other roads.

Luckily I live in the Chilterns so I can get to miles of offroad.

I can't find enough roads local to me that are pleasant to ride for recreation. Pottering in to the shops on a sit up and beg townie is fine and I get a lot of respect from other road users wobbling (tall bike and North Road bars) along in normal clothes. Switch to cycling gear and drop handlebars and the experience is quite different, Cars and lorries now think it's ok to come much closer, pull in tight after passing and deliberately block the filter to lights.

On the open road it only takes a single perceived near miss and the ride is ruined. Road engineers have embraced pinch points as a forlorn attempt to slow traffic down. Most car drivers don't understand all this primary and secondary position stuff, it's not part of their test, and there has been no attempt to push that information to drivers. Consequently many will assume you are deliberately impeding their progress for whatever reason seems most convenient at the time. That's the ones who have looked up from their phone often enough to have seen you at all.

I've come to the conclusion that much of the time, taking the lane is taking a risk that a driver behind is paying attention, and that is too great a risk these days to teach this method in cycle training. As for the strength in numbers argument, sod that, sounds like you want to use other cyclists as some sort of human shield, as we know drivers won't slow down unless they have to.

So I've sold the road bike, use Sustrans and shared use paths where I can, and drive/train to other parts of the country to ride more. I've figured out a couple of ways into and out of my town to the back roads to make a few loops, and with a Fargo, I rarely ride past a bridleway without shooting off for a look see, There are lots of empty roads away from towns and tourist honeypots, but they take some finding if you're starting from scratch. I miss road riding, it's what I did as a teenager and in my twenties before I found MTBs, but the UK roads will never feel safe to me without drastic change. If cycling is to be the missing link in transport policy, it really has to be on a proper, planned network of segregated routes. If you want to make it happen, cancel HS2 and put all the resource into (transport) cycling.

Only if you accept that the stats are an accurate reflection of risk...

so what your saying is that the numbers don't agree with your opinion so the numbers must be wrong then?

I take it you believe that crime is everywhere and that inflation is off the charts, that every survey ever done is wrong....

"...road riding requires a fatalism or blind faith I just don't have"

That.

but the UK roads will never feel safe to me without drastic change

Agreed, so what are YOU doing about it? If you want safe routes don't expect it to just happen, it won't.

I've come to the conclusion that much of the time, taking the lane is taking a risk that a driver behind is paying attention

Look behind you for a second longer than needed when you do it, and make eye contact with the driver. Signal, and give a wave.

Makes an enormous difference. They seem to see you as a human, rather than an irritation. As long as you don't do it too late and make them brake hard, they don't like that.

If cycling is to be the missing link in transport policy, it really has to be on a proper, planned network of segregated routes. If you want to make it happen, cancel HS2 and put all the resource into (transport) cycling.

Well that's got to be one of the most depressing posts I've ever read from someone on a cycling website. When the whole problem is about cyclists not being perceived by drivers as rightful road users on an equal basis, you want to segregate cyclists even more?

Segregation is not the answer. Segregated routes will NEVER service enough places, and the existence of a partial network will then convince drivers they really do own the roads.

It's ghettoisation.