5 Cyclists dead in 1 week in London

[andysays]

Whilst irritating, all those "risk-taking behaviours" are almost a total non-entity as a factor in cycling fatalities. So even if you could persuade the minority of cyclists who do them regularly it would have virtually no impact whatsoever on the number of deaths.

I'm sure that with the level of certainty you demonstrate in this post, you have to hand a comprehensive study proving this assertion beyond any doubt...

 

[laptop]

going down the lea

Circling over Wanstead

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Not as far as I can see, and I'm not trying to suggest that any of those individuals were reckless, necessarily, but I think it's impossible to argue that the fact that a small proportion of cyclists ride recklessly (as do a small proportion of car drivers, bus drivers, lorry drivers, etc) contributes to the level of accidents.

The thing that jumps out at me from that article, which I've mentioned already, is that so many of them happened on a Cycle Super Highway on the A11, where cyclists are positively encouraged to ride alongside cars, buses, lorries etc on a hugely busy road.

Common sense can be a dangerous thing to use in guiding opinion. I'd want to see some figures showing how those small proportion are disproportionately represented in accidents. I'd also like to know how disproportionately represented occasional cyclists are - ie how big a factor experience is, whether or not you're a rule follower. And as your second para hints, there can be times where following the rules actually puts you in more danger.

 

[8ball]

The thing that jumps out at me from that article, which I've mentioned already, is that so many of them happened on a Cycle Super Highway on the A11, where cyclists are positively encouraged to ride alongside cars, buses, lorries etc on a hugely busy road.

What exactly is this 'cycle superhighway' if it has buses and lorries on it?

 

[8ball]

Common sense can be a dangerous thing to use in guiding opinion. I'd want to see some figures showing how those small proportion are disproportionately represented in accidents. I'd also like to know how disproportionately represented occasional cyclists are - ie how big a factor experience is, whether or not you're a rule follower. And as your second para hints, there can be times where following the rules actually puts you in more danger.

Furthermore, it would be useful to see how variations in the levels of bad cycling by either idiots or the inexperienced contributes to the level of danger in general.

 

[8ball]

Whilst irritating, all those "risk-taking behaviours" are almost a total non-entity as a factor in cycling fatalities. So even if you could persuade the minority of cyclists who do them regularly it would have virtually no impact whatsoever on the number of deaths.

Citation needed.

 

[Pickman's model]

Whilst irritating, all those "risk-taking behaviours" are almost a total non-entity as a factor in cycling fatalities. So even if you could persuade the minority of cyclists who do them regularly it would have virtually no impact whatsoever on the number of deaths.

you're fucking fixated on deaths. have you not noticed i've also mentioned injuries? do you only get off on dead cyclists, are the injured and maimed not worthy of your attention?

 

[andysays]

What exactly is this 'cycle superhighway' if it has buses and lorries on it?

The cynic in me says it's just a corporate sponsored publicity campaign, which totally fails in its stated aims of giving people

safer, faster and more direct journeys into the city​

but you're welcome to make your own mind up.

 

[8ball]

The cynic in me says it's just a corporate sponsored publicity campaign, which totally fails in its stated aims of giving people

safer, faster and more direct journeys into the city​

but you're welcome to make your own mind up.

Interesting that none of the reports of deaths seem to refer to Barclays cycle super highways.

 

[andysays]

Common sense can be a dangerous thing to use in guiding opinion. I'd want to see some figures showing how those small proportion are disproportionately represented in accidents. I'd also like to know how disproportionately represented occasional cyclists are - ie how big a factor experience is, whether or not you're a rule follower. And as your second para hints, there can be times where following the rules actually puts you in more danger.

Yeah, I can see how occasional/inexperienced cyclists might be disproportionately represented, as might those experienced cyclists who unfortunately become arrogant/complacent/above the rules that only apply to the common herd.

Hopefully Lo Siento. will post the definitive survey in a minute, and this will answer all our questions...

Edited to include tag

 

[Pickman's model]

Interesting that none of the reports of deaths seem to refer to Barclays cycle super highways.

people could think it was bankers being run down and indifference would reign

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Furthermore, it would be useful to see how variations in the levels of bad cycling by either idiots or the inexperienced contributes to the level of danger in general.

Yep. How much of it is simply beyond the cyclist's control, whatever their abilities/considerate attitude? A fair bit, I would guess. The only time I've been knocked off my bike in London, it was entirely the driver's fault, and there is little I could have done.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Yeah, I can see how occasional/inexperienced cyclists might be disproportionately represented, as might those experienced cyclists who unfortunately become arrogant/complacent/above the rules that only apply to the common herd.

Yes, I think both those groups might be there - but I'll reserve judgement as there may be factors we haven't thought of.

 

[Miss-Shelf]

you're fucking fixated on deaths. have you not noticed i've also mentioned injuries? do you only get off on dead cyclists, are the injured and maimed not worthy of your attention?

are you really in disagreement with him about this? surely no one on this thread thinks that cyclists getting killed or injured is a thing to ignore? I don't really think anyone on this thread believes that cyclists being killed and injured through contact with large vehicles is really because some cyclists jump red lights do they? ok that's a lot of assumptions and you can pick holes in it if you like but is there not a basic agreement that cyclists need better provision and that larger vehicles need to change some of the ways they use the road* so that cyclists are more protected from danger?

cycling is not just about the individual benefits it's something that would benefit all people in transit across london - more trips achieved through cycling would relieve pressure on public transport and reduce some strain on nhs through improved fitness etc

*that could come from the times they are permitted into the centre
*their own training and awareness and thus their driving behaviour at junctions
*the equipment that large vehicles must fit and use that encourage them to look for cyclists

 

[Pickman's model]

Circling over Wanstead

cyclists ahoy

 

[Miss-Shelf]

Yep. How much of it is simply beyond the cyclist's control, whatever their abilities/considerate attitude? A fair bit, I would guess. The only time I've been knocked off my bike in London, it was entirely the driver's fault, and there is little I could have done.

twice I've been in minor collisions with vehicles and a near miss
all three times the vehicle was in the wrong although all three times taught me to take more account of the behaviour of other drivers
yes this taught me that there are always more things I can do to cycle defensively but those three drivers should not have been doing what they did - why are drivers not being continually pressed to take account of what cyclists may do? ie have to cycle round a drain cover or pothole unexpectedly? or to want to be first off at the lights so as to be in a good road position before cars zoom past?

 

[Pickman's model]

are you really in disagreement with him about this? surely no one on this thread thinks that cyclists getting killed or injured is a thing to ignore? I don't really think anyone on this thread believes that cyclists being killed and injured through contact with large vehicles is really because some cyclists jump red lights do they? ok that's a lot of assumptions and you can pick holes in it if you like but is there not a basic agreement that cyclists need better provision and that larger vehicles need to change some of the ways they use the road* so that cyclists are more protected from danger?

cycling is not just about the individual benefits it's something that would benefit all people in transit across london - more trips achieved through cycling would relieve pressure on public transport and reduce some strain on nhs through improved fitness etc

*that could come from the times they are permitted into the centre
*their own training and awareness and thus their driving behaviour at junctions
*the equipment that large vehicles must fit and use that encourage them to look for cyclists

pls read my posts on this thread before continuing in this vein.

 

[Miss-Shelf]

pls read my posts on this thread before continuing in this vein.

I think you take an unnecessarily antagonist tone of posting about something you're probably in agreement with (sorry I read page one and four and skipped 2 &3 - maybe they would have made your view more apparent)

 

[littlebabyjesus]

twice I've been in minor collisions with vehicles and a near miss
all three times the vehicle was in the wrong although all three times taught me to take more account of the behaviour of other drivers
yes this taught me that there are always more things I can do to cycle defensively but those three drivers should not have been doing what they did - why are drivers not being continually pressed to take account of what cyclists may do? ie have to cycle round a drain cover or pothole unexpectedly? or to want to be first off at the lights so as to be in a good road position before cars zoom past?

Absolutely. You learn from your near-misses, which is why I suspect inexperience will be a significant factor in accidents - not because the cyclist is in the wrong necessarily, but because they didn't anticipate the stupidity of the driver. And this is the kind of experience that cycling proficiency courses cannot give you. Only hours on the road will give it to you.

 

[Miss-Shelf]

Absolutely. You learn from your near-misses, which is why I suspect inexperience will be a factor in accidents - not because the cyclist is in the wrong necessarily, but because they didn't anticipate the stupidity of the driver. And this is the kind of experience that cycling proficiency courses cannot give you. Only hours on the road will give it to you.

although many accounts about injured and dead cyclists state they are experienced cyclists

 

[Pickman's model]

I think you take an unnecessarily antagonist tone of posting about something you're probably in agreement with (sorry I read page one and four and skipped 2 &3 - maybe they would have made your view more apparent)

i think you take a remarkably cavalier attitude to telling me what i think when you haven't - by your own admission - read what i think.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

although many accounts about injured and dead cyclists state they are experienced cyclists

Well, that is partly just down to time on the road. Men have more car accidents than women on average, due to no more strange a thing than that men drive more than women on average.

 

[Utopia]

anticipate the stupidity of the driver

....these 6 words should be repeated before any bike ride involving traffic of any kind.

 

[Pickman's model]

Absolutely. You learn from your near-misses, which is why I suspect inexperience will be a significant factor in accidents - not because the cyclist is in the wrong necessarily, but because they didn't anticipate the stupidity of the driver. And this is the kind of experience that cycling proficiency courses cannot give you. Only hours on the road will give it to you.

however cycling courses can give you a good foundation on which to build. just because someone's 'experienced' doesn't necessarily mean they're doing it right, it might mean they've done it wrong a lot of times and been lucky.

 

[Miss-Shelf]

Pickman's model I apologise for not reading all of the pages and admit that this probably would have presented a more balanced view of what you think

 

[Utopia]

Excellent blog on cycle safety - http://leighdayblog.com/2013/07/05/tomorrow-i-will-kiss-my-two-beautiful-children/#more-139

"
Tomorrow I will kiss my two beautiful children
Tomorrow I will kiss my two beautiful children and lovely wife goodbye. I know that whilst I am doing this I will be wondering whether I will ever see them again. I am not a member of the emergency services, nor brave enough to be a soldier, I am a cyclist.
I know I will be buzzed by a motorist, passing me too close as if to make a point. Vehicles will speed toward me and sometimes even speed up when passing me going the opposite way on narrow rural roads. They will turn across my path or drive without due care and attention, I know it’s coming and I can do nothing to prevent it.
None of those who have been killed or maimed ‘on the bike’, who I have known personally, have done so because of something they did.
They include the victim of one ton of metal hitting him from behind, driven by a mother who was at that moment turning round to deal with her errant toddlers, or the victim of the lorry driver who came down a slip road and drove straight over the cyclist he did not see......."

Worth a read.

 

[Lo Siento.]

I'm sure that with the level of certainty you demonstrate in this post, you have to hand a comprehensive study proving this assertion beyond any doubt...

Sadly, although there's nothing in the cycling accident stats (http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/adviceandinformation/cycling/facts-figures.aspx) to indicate that cyclists breaking the highway code has anything to do with fatalities (but there are indications that RLJing decreases your chance of being hit by an HGV http://www.rudi.net/node/16395), there's no study to prove the opposite. However, none of the well-publicised fatalities this year have involved any of the "high-risk behaviour" pickman's is on about. Given that neither you, nor he, has any reason whatsoever to imagine that it's "high risk cycling" that's the problem, seems to me that your agenda here is more about what irritates you about cyclists, rather than what would actually make cyclists safer.

 

[Lo Siento.]

you're fucking fixated on deaths. have you not noticed i've also mentioned injuries? do you only get off on dead cyclists, are the injured and maimed not worthy of your attention?

I genuinely think you couldn't give a flying fuck about cyclists, dead or injured, beyond the minor irritation they inflict on you in your everyday life.

 

[kittyP]

as i have said on another thread, it can't hurt to try. if cycling was taught at schools from, say, the age of 12 with refresher courses available then i would expect it to have some effect.

But as a driver, you have more training than most cyclists and are much more accountable for behaving badly on the road, and still the amount of despicably bad drivers out there shocks me whenever I am in a car. Be it from lack of confidence, over confidence or downright recklessness.
No matter how many road safety lessons we had as kids at school, people still as pedestrians use the roads recklessly.
I am not saying that training from a young age would not help at all but I think it would far from solve the problem.

Also, as with all road users, it's not always the ones using the roads recklessly that get hurt, often it's their impact on others that is the problem.

 

[Pickman's model]

But as a driver, you have more training than most cyclists and are much more accountable for behaving badly on the road, and still the amount of despicably bad drivers out there shocks me whenever I am in a car. Be it from lack of confidence, over confidence or downright recklessness.
No matter how many road safety lessons we had as kids at school, people still as pedestrians use the roads recklessly.
I am not saying that training from a young age would not help at all but I think it would far from solve the problem.

Also, as with all road users, it's not always the ones using the roads recklessly that get hurt, often it's their impact on others that is the problem.

i do not and never have driven