If I don’t agree with you that somehow makes me anti-bike? You are TJ and ICMFP.

Don’t remember calling any one anti bike.

Like a caterpillar to a butterfly, I think I am witnessing druid’s metamorphosis from a “man on the street with an internet connection” to an INTERNET BIG HITTER[/b] 😛

That would suggest you use it for your job.

About a 400 company miles last month, I work from home these days so don’t get about as much as before

If your using it twice a month though, i’m pretty sure a company car would not be applicable.

applicable to what? – it’s been part of my contract for 12 years or so, we have plenty of employees that do zero company miles per year

applicable to what? – it’s been part of my contract for 12 years or so, we have plenty of employees that do zero company miles per year

Do those employees also get a company car? Thats crazy, no?

Do those employees also get a company car? Thats crazy, no?

Yeah, some do, it’s part of their salary
It’s no more crazy that them going out and buying their own

Yeah, some do, it’s part of their salary
It’s no more crazy that them going out and buying their own

Fair enough! No option for a company bike? 🙂

Fair enough! No option for a company bike?

I can get one on C2W but the numbers are crap compared to buying them myself

druidh – Member

Those figures show that it is twice as safe per kilometre travelled than it used to be.

The graph jota180 posted above shows the relative decrease in accident rates. It doesn’t give you any idea how safe cycling in the UK actually is compared to countries like the Netherlands.

There could be 10,000 people killed one year, 5,000 the next and it would still be a 50% decrease.

There’s a good article here from David Hembrow on the way that the Netherland’s road safety figures can be misinterpreted. Sorry for the cached version, he appears to have made his blog private for some reason:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Pm5JsriBlXsJ:hembrow.blogspot.com/2010/05/just-how-safe-are-dutch-cyclists-and.html+cycling+in+holland+safer&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a

Mr Agreeable – Member
The graph jota180 posted above shows the relative decrease in accident rates. It doesn’t give you any idea how safe cycling in the UK actually is compared to countries like the Netherlands.

There could be 10,000 people killed one year, 5,000 the next and it would still be a 50% decThat’s correct, but you said.

If it’s that the total distance cyclists travel has gone up, well good on us, but that doesn’t mean it’s become more popular, or safer.

Whereas the figures actually show that – even in the UK – it is twice as safe as it used to be.

I’m sorry to labour this, but you are propagating a myth – that cycling the UK is more dangerous than ever. It’s exactly that sort of misinformation that puts people off cycling.

i’m finding it difficult to believe there’s so much opposition to CM on a cycling forum!

It’s probably a safe assumption that most people on here would like to see more drivers using their cars less and their bikes more.
CM’s main effect is to make these very drivers think that cycling is for militant, driver-hating twunts, which does nothing to promote that aim. So it’s not too surprising there’s not much support on here.

CM’s main effect is to make these very drivers think that cycling is for militant, driver-hating twunts, which does nothing to promote that aim. So it’s not too surprising there’s not much support on here.

Yeah, i read those arguments before posting, but i don’t agree.
I think i’ll leave it there. Its tea break time and my gears need sorting!

the figures actually show that – even in the UK – it is twice as safe as it used to be.

But saying “it’s twice as safe as it used to be” is disingenuous, when there are countries such as Denmark and the Netherlands where it’s objectively far safer, more people do it, and the country has noticeably lower rates of obesity-related disease.

I don’t even know if that reduction in casualties could be considered statistically significant, given that it’s a fraction of a fraction.

Cyclist deaths also went up by 7% last year, so it’s not like there’s a steady downwards trend.

It’s exactly that sort of misinformation that puts people off cycling.

Most people, when they find out I cycle regularly, tend to venture the opinion that it’s dangerous without any prompting from me whatsoever.

I can’t remember what proportion of the UK public said cycling was dangerous in that recent Sustrans survey – I think it was about 55% – but I remember being surprised it was so low.

Whats the point of having a car then?

Any journey that a bicycle isn’t approprite for, due to the fact that our mass transport system is disjointed, expensive and cycle-unfriendly.

My mum is 53 and she doesn’t cycle. She lives in a very small city in a poor rural county, with basically no hills. It is a compact city, but too far to walk from one end to the other comfortably. She walks the half hour to work every day because she hates driving and likes walking.

She would love to cycle to the supermarket to do her shopping, but she takes the car. The reason she doesn’t cycle is that she is scared.

She isn’t scared because she’s heard that lots of cyclists get killed. She is scared because she has cycled on the road before and felt what cars whizzing a couple of inches past her elbow feels like. She’s scared because she knows she cycles too slowly away from traffic lights for motorists’ liking. She’s scared because she can’t bear the thought of pulling into the middle of the lane to turn right.

I don’t think my mum should have training to become a hardcore vehicular cyclist. I think the government should build some **** infrastructure to support my mum doing something decent for herself and her little city. And any cyclist, like druidh, who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves if they think their approach can bring about mass cycling in this country.

And they can **** off too.

I do have to wonder where the opposition to separate cycling facilities comes from. Granted many of the current ones we have are crap, but they’re the product of years of underinvestment and feeble lip-service policies. I’m not talking about a white line painted on a road, or a pavement that suddenly become a cycle path by adding a sign.

Is it just, like with the TJ helmet threads, people fear that their autonomy is going to be taken away, and massively overreact?

Anyone who drives into the centre of Manchester is a completely selfish bell end. There is simply no need to do so. They are just making it into a bigger shitehole than it is already.

project – Member
so many roads in cities are double laned going both ways, just take one lane out and make it a cycle lane, so bikes have their own lane and other traffic its own lane, with on street limited parking in the cycle lane part, for loading and unloading.

You could allow some other traffic in it too though – maybe buses? Then you could call it a bus lane.

But by allowing vehicles to park to loadf and unload, stops buses getting through, a cyclist needs a bout 3 feet a bus is 8 foot 6 wide, plus its mirrors and then needs a space to clear other vehicles, so no to bus lanes.

Anyone who drives into the centre of Manchester is a completely selfish bell end. There is simply no need to do so. They are just making it into a bigger shitehole than it is already.

So when i drive into Mcr, where are the park and rides on the out skirts, i could go by train, but it needs 2 trains a mile walk and a cost of 30 quid for 2 peeps.

You can park at any train station on the outskirts for free or cheap and pay a couple of quid to get the train in. It may be slightly less convenient for you, but this is where the selfish bit comes in. There are ways to do it, but the truth hurts sometimes.

I suspect most naysayers on here drive more
than cycle.

You’re right about me nowadays. But wrong really. I formed my opinion on CM a while back when I didn’t have a car and was actually working as a cycle courier and seeing the worst of driver’s actions on a regular basis. I’m against it because I think it fails to improve things for cyclists or even worse, it turns drivers even more against us just like cyclists RLJing does. all IMO of course but backed up by all my experiences.

Perhaps. Or maybe i’m finding it difficult to believe there’s so much opposition to CM on a cycling forum!

A bit like opposition to football hooligans on a football forum?

The Dutch and the Danes have a big cycling population – and therefore – far more infrastructure to support it in a large part because they as as flat as a witches tit
Trying to hold them up as countries to emulate as far as getting people on bikes is unrealistic

people are naturally lazy – even the Dutch

I’ve never even started a car, let alone drive one, or own one. Therefore, I have the moral high ground on anyone who drives here. That’s how it works on here, isn’t it? 🙂

The Dutch and the Danes have a big cycling population – and therefore – far more infrastructure to support it in a large part because they as as flat as a witches tit

Nope – thats not the reason. the reason is that the dutch decided in the 60s and 70s to make cyling a priority in their cities so planned for it. This explains how the dutch rebalanced their cities in favour of cycling

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuBdf9jYj7o[/video]

so the fact that they’re flat did not have a large effect on folks staying on bikes?

EDIT – so you reckon the Dutch model would work just as well in – say – the Peaks?

There aren’t cities in the peaks though?

so are we talking about general cycling or city cycling?

the talk above has been about casualty figures for the whole country

jota180 – Member

so the fact that they’re flat did not have a large effect on folks staying on bikes?

Did you watch the vid? Cycling in the early 60s was similar to the numbers here and declining. Policies to encourage cycling and to rebalance the cities in favour of bikes worked. The dutch model would work anywhere.

The Dutch and the Danes have a big cycling population – and therefore – far more infrastructure to support it in a large part because they as as flat as a witches tit

Cycle paths weren’t built in the Netherlands because there were lots of cyclists. They were built in response to a popular campaign which highlighted safety and the number of child deaths in road accidents. Have a Google for that “how the Dutch got their cycle paths” video, it’s been posted on here loads.

Edit: and now TJ’s just posted it on this thread.

We don’t have real hills in most of the UK either, you know. 😉

Cycle paths weren’t built in the Netherlands because there were lots of cyclists. They were built in response to a popular campaign

How can you have a popular campaign without cycling being popular? Who were the popular campaigners?

just a thought 😉

I’m using a phone TJ so can’t see the vt – seen it before though

again, do you think the terrain has no influence on ccyling?

Thats not what you asked – of course it does but Edinburgh is a hilly city and has a a high ( for the UK) cycling population.

If dutch policies or similar enlightened ones were followed here we would have far greater rates of cycling and our cities and towns would be far more pleasant places.

I’m against it because I think it fails to improve things for cyclists or even worse, it turns drivers even more against us just like cyclists RLJing does.

To be honest I don’t think the people who endanger me on my commute are all doing it because they assume I’m a red light jumping crusty. I’m sure a lot of them are just thoughtless and have no experience of what it’s like to cycle on a busy road.

If there were more Critical Mass rides with a cuddly, family-friendly image it could potentially encourage people to treat cyclists as humans. I don’t know what the Manchester one is like in person, but from the rules on their site they seem quite into not pissing off motorists or endangering pedestrians:

http://ibikemcr.org.uk/?q=critical-mass

Thats not what you asked

yes it was

How can you have a popular campaign without cycling being popular? Who were the popular campaigners?

The focus of the campaign wasn’t cycling, it was children.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ss42vt48_lsJ:hembrow.blogspot.com/2011/01/stop-child-murder.html+stop+die+kindermoord&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a

It is difficult to campaign for better conditions for “cyclists” in Britain. Cyclists are a minority group, and not a very well liked minority at that. Cyclists can be considered to be an out-group. This is a large part of why it is that cycling initiatives come and go in Britain. There’s no real emphasis placed on results because too few people see it as important. When cyclists in Britain are hit by cars, they get very little sympathy from the public at large.

Campaigning for child safety is different. Very different. Children are not a minority group. Most families include children, all adults used to be children. Child safety is an issue which is important to everyone and difficult to ignore. All parents want their children to be safe.

Which is why I reckon Sustrans are bang on the money with this campaign:

http://www.sustrans.org.uk/freerangekids/about-free-range-kids

The population density in the Netherlands is massively higher than we have in the UK
that has to have a substantial effect on how the population chooses to get around

The population density in the Netherlands is massively higher than we have in the UK
that has to have a substantial effect on how the population chooses to get around

But Denmark and Germany both have lower population density than the UK, and much higher rates of cycling.

I really wish David Hembrow’s blog was still public as he addresses all these points really clearly – hills, population, space, the lot. The truth is we’d rather be moaning about something than doing something about it

jota180 – Member

The population density in the Netherlands is massively higher than we have in the UK
that has to have a substantial effect on how the population chooses to get around

Nope – its similar to most of the UK – some areas of the UK are higher. UK overall numbers are held down by the highlands.

I hate to break it to the auto-apologists here (actually, I love it but 😛 ) but having hills doesn’t matter. You can walk up all the hills pushing your bike in UK cities, and still get to your destination quicker than sat in a noxious traffic jam at rush hour. People by and large don’t cycle here because, rightly or wrongly, they are afraid of you motorists killing them.

I’ve been to Copenhagen in December and seen mothers cycling their kids to school with a blizzard blowing snow horizontally around them. That is NORMAL.

I really wish David Hembrow’s blog was still public as he addresses all these points really clearly – hills, population, space, the lot. The truth is we’d rather be moaning about something than doing something about it

If I were being honest, I reckon we have the balance about right now
I certainly don’t have any major issues riding on the road in a medium sized town.
just like the city dwellers, I don’t really care how tough it is for folks in other types of urban environments – it’s all me, me, me 😀