So what do you think would improve safety for cyclists?

How safe are we going to make it? Whats an acceptable level of danger?

I can see the marketing campaign now. Beckham* on a bike complete with helmet, just watch them fly out of the shops.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
* Or whoever is the latest darling. It’s all about marketing them correctly.

Cycling is safe – as safe as walking with the odds of a fatal accident to an experienced adult in the millions to one region

he’s right you know.

Would love to see a “serious” candidate for election put the aforementioned fuel rationing, compulsory private parking charges, etc. on their campaign manifesto.

I’d vote for them (unless it was a BNP guy).

I suspect they may be waving goodbye to their deposit.

Cycling is safe – as safe as walking with the odds of a fatal accident to an experienced adult in the millions to one region

Woo hoo! I’m off to buy a lottery ticket, thankfully the incedent I suffered wasn’t fatal, the helmet definitely saved me from more serious injuries. Or is this simply another question of extremes? With regard to fatalities you’re probably right. With regard to head injuries…?

Or is this simply another question of extremes? With regard to fatalities you’re probably right. With regard to head injuries…?

2010 figures suggest the risk of injury (on the road) is around 5516 injuries per billion miles travelled.
Risk of serious injury or death is 889 per billion miles.

Not bad, though mile-for-mile you’re around 22 times less likely to be killed in a car.

I think, us being intransigent humans and all that, it will take something utterly appalling for us to stop and fundamentally change our thinking about cycling. Like the Omagh bombing. Too awful even those who condoned that sort of thing to not feel bad about. Why do we always have to wait for something like this before we act. It’s always the same.

I think actually helmets are a side issue. Preventing accidents is the way forward. Many, if not most, accidents could be prevented by the cyclist.

Route choice. Avoid the 70mph dual carriageway if there is a low speed alternate route of similar length etc.

Use a mirror.

Don’t ride in the doorzone.

Don’t undertake large vehicles.

Ride far enough from the kerb that if a swerve is needed to avoid a pothole or anything else seen at the last second the swerve can be towards the kerb. Also allows a move towards the kerb if an upcoming close overtake is seen in the mirror.

The other big change is dealing with bad driving. Tricky because millions of voters would oppose tougher laws. I’m thinking things like driving bans after 6 or at most 9 points rather than 12. Why should a driver be allowed 4 driving convictions in 3 years before a ban?

And at the present there are too many exception to getting banned. If a ban will cause exceptional hardship then don’t break the law. Simples.

And mobile phones – unlike speeding where lack of attention (not that I’m excusing it) can lead to getting done using a handheld phone while driving is a deliberate choice. The danger caused is similar to driving at the legal alcohol limit so the penalty should match – immediate ban.

Saw a cyclist on the A1(M) today. Isn’t that ever so slightly illegal and a tad dangerous?

CTC estimates that … CTC does not accept this
estimate

Personally I’m neither for nor against compulsory helmet wearing. I choose to wear one and am happy with my choice. I believe wearing a helmet has saved me from potentially serious injury on more than one occasion. That’s good enough for me, regardless of what a couple of ‘studies’ using o-level maths claim.

Whatever the answer is it isn’t helmets.

But I agree with this. A helmet won’t stop you getting crushed by a truck. But I don’t wear a helmet to prevent being squashed by a truck, I wear one to help reduce the chance of serious head injury if i get knocked off or fall off my bike. Wearing ahelmet is a personal protection issue, not a road safety one.

Many, if not most, accidents could be prevented by the cyclist.

Again, Id really like to see some facts to back up this statement.

That’s good enough for me, regardless of what a couple of ‘studies’ using o-level maths claim.

Behave yourself.

Go and try to educate yourself about bicycle helmets instead of falling for the ‘I’ve got a helmet on and it saved my life’ cobblers.

It’s a complex and nuanced debate, and making simpleton statements about it makes you look like a simpleton.

It’s an inch of polystyrene, if you seriously believe it will save you from a ‘serious head injury’, then you haven’t had much experience of serious head injuries.

I thought the helmet thing was largely done now. They might reduce minor injuries (like a lot of low speed mountain biking falls) but do almost nothing in the case of serious injuries and death.
Really, we should be advising car drivers to wear helmets if we want to save lives.

It’s an inch of polystyrene, if you seriously believe it will save you from a ‘serious head injury’, then you haven’t had much experience of serious head injuries.

No I haven’t, fortunately, as i’ve been wearing a helmet.

Go and try to educate yourself about bicycle helmets instead of falling for the ‘I’ve got a helmet on and it saved my life’ cobblers.

Having seen the damage to three helmets sustained in accidents, i’d say that that inch of polystyrene probably prevented similar damage happening to my skull. I accept a helmet isn’t a magical force-filed which will prevent all serious injury, but i believe, based on my own experience, that wearing a helmet has probably saved me from serious injury.

I’m not forcing you to wear one.

See mike, I have seen serious head injuries, and I know that an inch of polystyrene doesn’t stop you having one.

It’s not a black and white issue, and it’s not a simple as wear one and get away with it.

Educate yourself.

having read most of this thread (ignored the helmet bit on page 4 sorry) I have learnt that

1)Germany has a law that states cyclists have priority over cars
2)The Netherlands have a law that rules that the car is automatically responsible in a crash
3)the belgians give bikes priority over cars

FFS HOW OBVIOUS IS THE SOLUTION

edhornby – thats assumed liability and is only for civil cases not criminal – and all it does is mean the car driver has to show why his collision with the cyclist is not his fault – it also applies to bike / pedestrian collisions – the bike rider is assumed to be at fault unless evidence to suggest otherwise.

It does however help set an attitude

It’s not a black and white issue, and it’s not a simple as wear one and get away with it.

I’m not claiming it is. Just that they seem to have worked for me.

Get over yourself. You really are rather rude, aren’t you?

“Many, if not most, accidents could be prevented by the cyclist.”

Again, Id really like to see some facts to back up this statement.

There was a recent study published in Australia where 158 cyclists injured badly enough to require hospital admission were interviewed.

The vast majority of the accidents were easily avoidable. For a start 61% did not involve another vehicle. Causes ranged from a handbag hanging from the handlebars getting caught in the front wheel to a pilates mat being carried that jammed between fork and wheel. Five crashes were caused by broken or disengaged chains. One crash was caused by broken forks. 10 riders crashed into doors being opened in parked cars. Numerous riders hit objects or debris in the road. 4 riders were using mobile phones when they crashed.

Of the 39% (61 riders) of crashes that involved other vehicles – around a quarter crashed into parked or stationary cars. Around 10% (15 riders) crashed after hitting other cyclists.

I’d say that most of these crashes were avoidable. Don’t ride in the doorzone, look where you are going, ride a well maintained bike, carry luggage properly etc. Don’t ride into parked cars.

“The rider was heading north on Beach Road near Love Street, Blackrock, was climbing and steered around a parked van. The rider then merged left but had his head down. The rider was then knocked unconscious after running into the rear of a second parked vehicle, with sufficient force to break its rear windscreen”.

http://www.monash.edu.au/miri/research/reports/muarc311.pdf

In a UK context how many riders have been killed by left turning HGVs or buses? Completely avoidable.

I’ve been touring and commuting on the roads for decades without an accident. Am I just lucky or can a cyclist with average skill and a bit of care and attention anticipate and avoid the causes of most accidents?

Steam gives way to sail. The theory of that Dutch system is das solution in mine eyes!

Can’t see it happening for many reasons. It’s the big idea that
could turn the tide.

A manifesto for Wig go – bonanza!

I’ve been touring and commuting on the roads for decades without an accident. Am I just lucky or can a cyclist with average skill and a bit of care and attention anticipate and avoid the causes of most accidents?

I wonder how many of those dead riders thought they were more skilfull/careful than average too?

I wonder how many of those dead riders thought they were more skilfull/careful than average too?

It doesn’t matter what they thought. They obviously weren’t more skilled/careful than average if they put themselves in the path of a left turning HGV or bus or went so close to a parked car they hit a door being opened. I don’t see what is controversial about recognising known risks and avoiding them.

CBA reading the preceeding 5 pages, I assume all of this has been stated already but just in case things I think our Government should initiate (in no particular order):

1- General awareness campaign (Similar to the “THINK BIKE” one for motorcyclists) Still not sure why we lack one…

2- Greater emphasis on Cyclist awareness in driving tests at all levels (From Motor-bikes all the way up to HGVs).

3- better subsidised, more widely available access for all (Adults, children, famiies) to bikability/cycle proficiency type training, including online learning materials (like the DVLA have for driving theory) to act as a refresher/reinforcer of best practice.

4- Stronger promotion (but not compulsion) for the use of cycle helmets, including material on correct fitting and adjustment.

5- As a bare minimum Better planning guidlines but ideally a National Authority/centre of expertise dedicated to the safest/best practicable implementation of cycle routes across town and reigional road planning, with the power to vito any proposal which would they feel would increse danger to cyclists, and to compell local authorities to improve known existing problem spots…

6- Greater Subsidy for all of the above, it needs investment.

All of that could be done, it’s not beyond the wit of man and any transport minister (possibly with the assistance of a minister for sport?) looking to capitalise on the Wiggins effect would benefit from being able to say ” Road safety for cyclists improved during my time in office”…

I struggle with long sentences.

From my personal experience.

More drivers who ride and therefore understand more about bikes and how the riders feel.

More riders who drive, and particularly more people with practical HGV/PSV experience. I drive 7.5T trucks periodically and the size of the blindspots is terrifying, and they’re minimal compared to an artic. More mirrors help, but only so far, as any mirror on the opposite side of the vehicle you’re looking at from 7+ feet away, and if it’s a “wide angle” effort, objects in it appear even smaller. (FWIW you couldn’t pay me enough to drive a large HGV around central London in rush hour with the sheer number of uncontrolled, unpredictable, barely able to ride cyclists about)

EVERYBODY – drivers, cyclists and peds paying proper attention to what’s happening around them. Pedestrians who step off pavements with their phones glued to their ears. Drivers who never use their mirrors. Cyclists who never look over their shoulder or who may have their lights on at night, then cover them with a long coat.

EVERYBODY – drivers, cyclists and peds – reading, understanding and abiding by the highway code. All the guidance needed to exist successfully side by side is in there if we just make use of it. We all have rights, but we all have responsibilities too.

Helmets, hiviz, bikelanes, IMO are all pretty irrelevant – that’s all about solving the symptoms, not the original ailment. It’s all about respect for one another. I feel much safer riding in London where far more other road users are simply used to bikes as a fact of life, than I do now living in Sheff, where drivers are still a little unsure how to treat us (getting better though). Many London cyclists would improve their safety further by taking better responsibility for their own actions, using common sense and abiding by the rules of the road.

I don’t see what is controversial about recognising known risks and avoiding them.

Nothing at all. It’s good to recognise the risks and mitigate them. That’s entirely sensible and not what I was getting at.

What I meant was, many of those killed will have thought they were taking all reasonable care and were aware of the risks. And a significant number probably were.

Thinking you are safe because you know the risks and take greater care than most is a dangerous line of thought IMO. As is the flipside of that argument which apportions blame to the victims.

And of course if you were really trying to avoid the risks, you wouldn’t be riding on the road at all!

I drive 7.5T trucks periodically and the size of the blindspots is terrifying

Out of interest, how do you feel about the proposed blindspot cameras or sensors?

Seems to be mixed opinion as far as I can gather. Theoretically a good idea, but I’ve heard objections cameras mean more screens for a driver to watch and sensors would beep every time you pulled up next to a bin or busstop, so would soon be ignored.

I think if a buzzer went off everytime a lorry went past a bus stop, they wouldn’t get fitted. The cameras i’ve seen are excellent. Theres only one screen (not 12 mirrors) and it shows everything around the lorry. Its a “virtual camera” type view, made up from multiple feeds. Like this…

No problems with technology being used as a driver aid. Also give me things like cruise-control with a speed limiter mode, so I can concentrate on the road and not the speedo in 20 zones, roadworks, average speed limit zones etc. If I said that on certain other road/commuter bike forums, I’d probably be hounded off the forum.

Not seen the vid yet (at work) so don’t know if they cause information overload.

Truck-Cyclist interfacing obviously needs some effort on both sides. Does UK still have a proliferation of railings at city centre traffic lights? Remove them, and that one half of the problem gone that causes cyclists to be crushed by large vehicles turning left.

Take a bus/40-ton artic./truck to every school on cycling proficiency day. Get them to sit in the driver’s seat, and see how many of their freinds/classmates they can see.

Does UK still have a proliferation of railings at city centre traffic lights? Remove them, and that one half of the problem gone that causes cyclists to be crushed by large vehicles turning left.

Yep. Likewise the cycle lanes that come up the left hand side to reach the ASL, encouraging people to ride through a blindspot to get to another blindspot!

Can’t we get the scrap metal thieves to steal them, instead of stealing church roofs and ripping up fibre-optics expecting them to be copper?

Traffic signs on back of buses and trucks (I’m sure they must do this?), indicating to cyclists not to filter up the inside (or even some other technology to highlight that even more if the LH indicator is flashing)

I did actually RATS, and there are some good suggestions on this thread.

What’s needed isn’t one specific measure, but a reprioritisation of pedestrian and cyclist traffic over motor vehicles in places where the two mix.

That means lower speed limits[/url], stopping up rat runs or making them one-way, proper continuous cycle lanes that don’t expect you to give way or merge every hundred yards, restrictions on where people can park (does your car HAVE to be kept right outside your front door all the time?), less tolerance of motoring offences (At present you can kill repeatedly and still be back driving in 6 years), restrictions on HGVs in city centres, not forcing cyclists to share the same road space as buses, and more.

Giving cyclists free training, helmets and hi-viz, while I’m sure it’s done with the best of intentions, has already been tried, and doesn’t seem to make a blind bit of difference. Unless your overall aim is to make cyclists switch to cars.

EVERYBODY – drivers, cyclists and peds paying proper attention to what’s happening around them. Pedestrians who step off pavements with their phones glued to their ears. Drivers who never use their mirrors. Cyclists who never look over their shoulder or who may have their lights on at night, then cover them with a long coat.

EVERYBODY – drivers, cyclists and peds – reading, understanding and abiding by the highway code. All the guidance needed to exist successfully side by side is in there if we just make use of it. We all have rights, but we all have responsibilities too.

Helmets, hiviz, bikelanes, IMO are all pretty irrelevant – that’s all about solving the symptoms, not the original ailment. It’s all about respect for one another. I feel much safer riding in London where far more other road users are simply used to bikes as a fact of life, than I do now living in Sheff, where drivers are still a little unsure how to treat us (getting better though). Many London cyclists would improve their safety further by taking better responsibility for their own actions, using common sense and abiding by the rules of the road.

+1

Many London cyclists would improve their safety further by taking better responsibility for their own actions, using common sense and abiding by the rules of the road.

This is true. However, things could be improved far more if the same ideals were applied to drivers too. Because by far the worst offenders in London are drivers. Blaming cyclists disproportionately for problems is just self-defeating. Drivers have to take responsibility and act more safely and considerately towards cyclists, or we’ll get nowhere.

Why not just stop making or importing cars into the country, there are just far too many on the roads full stop…Think of the benefits?!

haha – /me imagines 60M cyclists all on 3 week pilgrimage on foot to Felixtowe to collect their new bikes as they arrive from Taiwan. And the DHL rickshaw delivering their replacement chains/cassettes/etc. from CRC 😉

edit: on some other forums I’ve been on, the only safe speed for traffic is 0 MPH (and remember, these are cyclists that bleat on about “we are the traffic” 😉 )

And the DHL rickshaw delivering their replacement chains/cassettes/etc. from CRC

Would still be faster than parcelforce.

Would still be faster than parcelforce.

You’re not wrong! Mind you, strapping it to the back of a laser-guided tortoise would be faster than parcelforce.

That is true. I said DHL based on my guess that DeutschePost-DHL will have bought RM/Parcelfarce by then 😉

Or a turtle. I suppose you could use a turtle also.