Apparently, we hold up ambulances

[Lonestar]

I saw the aftermath. That car must have been going some to bend the lamp post it hit.

That's another good thing about cars.

 

[classic33]

I cycled up the Wells Road yesterday morning. There was an accident on the roundabout below the 3 lamps junction. Strangely the ambulance chose to come down the wrong side of the road because there were about 100+ cars stationary on the in bound side of the road, and I heard it coming and had moved onto the pavement in advance.

So I'd say it was the opposite, that cars get in the way of ambulances and that bikes enable Ambulances to move quicker through the city

Done traffic point a few times, and it soon shows that everyones journey is important enough to slow down as they pass(to get a look). I simply stop traffic in all directions if the roads are wide enough. Anything on blue's & two's then has a clear lane, when they're heard ir seen approaching.

Tough luck to those held up.

 

[mjr]

If you build them properly (basically: wide enough, smooth enough, with bollards that emergency-service bumpers can push flat), cycle tracks help emergency vehicles bypass congestion caused by motorists:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6BV9kWFUYU


As well as "bobbies on bicycles, two by two", good cycling infrastructure also enables faster paramedics because bikes are faster in built-up areas - we have cycle response units in King's Lynn, too:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fE4r99E6DnM

 

[Drago]

I did some training with them in MK a few years back.

 

[classic33]

If you build them properly (basically: wide enough, smooth enough, with bollards that emergency-service bumpers can push flat), cycle tracks help emergency vehicles bypass congestion caused by motorists:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6BV9kWFUYU


As well as "bobbies on bicycles, two by two", good cycling infrastructure also enables faster paramedics because bikes are faster in built-up areas - we have cycle response units in King's Lynn, too:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fE4r99E6DnM

The first would get the driver a cautuon, and possibly two crews split. They've to be able to explain and defend their actions, even though they may be responding to a life or death situation at the time.

 

[screenman]

Who do you think should not own cars?

Dogs?

 

[jefmcg]

I saw the aftermath. That car must have been going some to bend the lamp post it hit.

Modern lampposts a designed to collapse if they are struck as a safety feature, the collision may not have been at the extreme speed it appears.

 

[jefmcg]

Dogs?

That's one TMN to @Milkfloat

I would start with the dogs.

 

[mjr]

The first would get the driver a cautuon, and possibly two crews split.

What the fark for?

Modern lampposts a designed to collapse if they are struck as a safety feature, the collision may not have been at the extreme speed it appears.

Some were installed in Norfolk and had stickers on saying "Jerol - Crash Friendly ✓" - which wasn't funny until we got it removed from the middle of the cycle track!

 

[classic33]

What the fark for?

Why do you think?

 

[mjr]

Why do you think?

I can't see they've done anything wrong. The TRO/TMOs for cycleways used to state something like "Nothing in this Order shall apply so as to prevent any person from causing a vehicle to proceed or wait along the lengths of road specified in that Article if the vehicle being used: (a) is for fire brigade, police or ambulance purposes; [...] " and I expect a similar exception is in the TSRGD 2016 (which removed the need for Orders to create cycle lanes).

 

[Lonestar]

Modern lampposts a designed to collapse if they are struck as a safety feature, the collision may not have been at the extreme speed it appears.

Ok,I concur.I thought it was slightly suspicious.I've seen a lot of bent lamp posts and boy racers round here.

 

[swansonj]

Recently had the pleasure of a ride in an ambulance. Some accidents are more urgent than others, but I had the flashing light treatment to get to A&E, only to be put into the waiting queue which took up to 3 hrs until I was fully seen and sent home with pain killers. I wonder if ambulance drivers should be more selective & patient?

The other aspect that surprised me was that the driver and his companion had to stay with me for about an hour, until I was handed over to the A&E staff. I always imagined an ambulance crew would be back on the road as soon as they had delivered the patient to A&E.

When I went to A&E the crew handed me over to the nurses quite quickly. But the crew then hung around because they'd used a fancy inflatable splint on my leg, and they told me they knew from experience that if they left without it, it would mysteriously have disappeared the next time they were there and asked for it...

 

[classic33]

When I went to A&E the crew handed me over to the nurses quite quickly. But the crew then hung around because they'd used a fancy inflatable splint on my leg, and they told me they knew from experience that if they left without it, it would mysteriously have disappeared the next time they were there and asked for it...

They open a bandage they've a sheet to record why, to fill in.

 

[ufkacbln]

I remember a few years ago the London Ambulance Service claimed thousands died each year because of speed bumps!

The Chairman of the London Ambulance Service, Sigurd Reinton, recently claimed that speed humps are killing hundreds of Londoners by delaying 999 crews. He said “For every life saved through traffic calming, more are lost because of ambulance delays.”

There are about 8,000 heart attack victims in London every year, and London has a particularly poor survival rate. One reason is no doubt because even a small delay increases the death rate enormously. For example 90% of victims survive if treated within 2 minutes, but it falls to 10% if treatment is delayed for 6 minutes. So for every additional minute of delay caused, up to an extra 800 victims of cardiac arrest could die. This compares with a total of 300 people who die from traffic accidents.

Mr Reinton complained that the increasing number of anti-car measures such as speed humps, road closures, road narrowing and throttle points caused significant delays in responding to emergencies. Ambulances had to go even slower if carrying a critically ill patient.

Note that Kevin Knight, who is responsible for local London Ambulance services, also spoke against speed bumps using the same arguments at the recent council Environment Portfolio holders meeting. He said they were now meeting the government target of reaching 75% of life threatening calls within 8 minutes (Editor: which is not good enough to save most heart attack victims - see above), but it was getting more and more difficult to do so and even a few seconds delay could impact the chance of survival for heart attack victims. Traffic calming features caused significant delays - for example 50% of the ambulances from one station would have had to go through the proposed Leesons Hill “throttle” where there would be queuing traffic.

Research in the USA supports these claims. One report from Boulder, Colorado suggests that for every life saved by traffic calming, as many as 85 people may die because emergency vehicles are delayed. It found response times are typically extended by 14% by speed-reduction measures. Another study conducted by the fire department in Austin, Texas showed an increase in the travel time of ambulances when transporting victims of up to 100%.

Note that Kathleen Calongne who lives in Boulder, Colorado has produced a note that gives more details on the opposition to speed humps in the USA and includes detail references to the above mentioned research -

Again it was rubbish, there was no proof of the delays, and they had assumed every single heart attack patient had died due to a delay to get their figures

Classic was that it was eventually shown the originator was a paramedic who was miffed at local speed humps making him slow down in his Lamborghini