How To Improve Commuter Safety (Tell me your pain points and wildest ideas)

[kingrollo]

Yet more gizmos and gadgets intended to be used by the cyclist would seem to be 'overkill' - have any of them been independently proven to give a significant improvement in safety, over and above the basics of good lighting and riding to a standard appropriate to the situation? is my question. I fear we will soon be so very burdened by what we are expected to both wear and carry in the way of unproven and even ineffective safety devices that we'll all need electric wheels to help us both carry and power the range of safety devices which surround and enclose us!

Surely it would be better by far to aim research, and hence the next generation of devices intended to protect the vulnerable road user, at the main factor which causes this vulnerability - the ICE or E driver in the heavy metal can. If something constructive wrt this could be done, it would protect every vulnerable road user, not just the person using a specific device marketed to a single section of the 'vulnerable user' population.

We all know the stats most cycling deaths and injuries are the fault of the driver. Yet we still cycle. I'm not saying bolt every gadget dreamed up onto your bike. But equally if someone has a bright (no pun) idea I wouldn't dismiss it

 

[KnittyNorah]

We all know the stats most cycling deaths and injuries are the fault of the driver. Yet we still cycle. I'm not saying bolt every gadget dreamed up onto your bike. But equally if someone has a bright (no pun) idea I wouldn't dismiss it

I would want to see EVIDENCE - hard, real-world, UK-collected and analysed evidence - that the gizmo actually leads to a calculable improvement in safety, in the conditions we find ourselves here in the UK before it is marketed as such. Not just anecdotal or 'surely it's obvious' type of evidence ...
Busy roads, bad surfaces, poor lighting, short daylight hours, low sunshine, strong winds, inattentive road users of all statuses (stati?) ...

 

[HobbesOnTour]

Yet more gizmos and gadgets intended to be used by the cyclist would seem to be 'overkill' - have any of them been independently proven to give a significant improvement in safety, over and above the basics of good lighting and riding to a standard appropriate to the situation? is my question. I fear we will soon be so very burdened by what we are expected to both wear and carry in the way of unproven and even ineffective safety devices that we'll all need electric wheels to help us both carry and power the range of safety devices which surround and enclose us!

Surely it would be better by far to aim research, and hence the next generation of devices intended to protect the vulnerable road user, at the main factor which causes this vulnerability - the ICE or E driver in the heavy metal can. If something constructive wrt this could be done, it would protect every vulnerable road user, not just the person using a specific device marketed to a single section of the 'vulnerable user' population.

There's nothing to disagree with here but.....
This is a student seeking input on the design of a product for a final year project.

The biggest advance in road safety (for all) will come from a change in attitude (from all) and that's probably beyond the wit of a single disciplined final year student (no offence to the OP).

Personally, I think the greatest risk to cyclists will be the rapid growth in silent electric vehicles. An early warning system for those could be very helpful.

 

[All uphill]

Yet more gizmos and gadgets intended to be used by the cyclist would seem to be 'overkill' - have any of them been independently proven to give a significant improvement in safety, over and above the basics of good lighting and riding to a standard appropriate to the situation? is my question. I fear we will soon be so very burdened by what we are expected to both wear and carry in the way of unproven and even ineffective safety devices that we'll all need electric wheels to help us both carry and power the range of safety devices which surround and enclose us!

Surely it would be better by far to aim research, and hence the next generation of devices intended to protect the vulnerable road user, at the main factor which causes this vulnerability - the ICE or E driver in the heavy metal can. If something constructive wrt this could be done, it would protect every vulnerable road user, not just the person using a specific device marketed to a single section of the 'vulnerable user' population.

I completely agree.

Imo the attention of everyone concerned needs to be directed to two things:

Training and reinforcement of the things that cyclists and pedestrians can already do to protect themselves. Hand signals, awareness, visibility. I agree that trying to find a new gizmo is easy and fun, but unlikely to address the problem.

Working on an approach to reduce the harm and risk from motorised vehicles. Dedicated cycling infrastructure, 20 is plenty, sanctions, public awareness campaigns for example. This is tough, but important things often are.

I'll keep writing to my MP, reporting offenders and potholes.

 

[Oldhippy]

We could of course put the onus on the people driving their mobile lounge and make them responsible for the car they are driving and pay attention to the fact that others use the road with equal rights. Make misdeeds draconian and costly. Why on earth is the vulnerable user constantly having to wear brighter, sillier clothing, invest in mad gadgets in order that a driver gets to the supermarket a mile away without having to pay much attention?

 

[KnittyNorah]

There's nothing to disagree with here but.....
This is a student seeking input on the design of a product for a final year project.

The biggest advance in road safety (for all) will come from a change in attitude (from all) and that's probably beyond the wit of a single disciplined final year student (no offence to the OP).

Surely designing something that will inevitably be of doubtful efficacy and that has already been thought of is ... well, useless.

Now, designing something useless when one is designing something ornamental or even partially ornamental, is one thing - there is little and sometimes no 'use', in a purely functional sense, in a great many items we are happy to spend our money on, as evinced at the massive exhibition I have just attended with great pleasure and enthusiasm! - but designing something with the specific purpose of enhancing safety is a very different matter and requires a very different approach indeed.

If the OP has to design something to improve the safety of cyclists, that is to be used by a cyclist, he or she might well seek to improve somewhat on some sort of gadget that is already in existence but which does not operate as well as it might, especially in the adverse conditions we often find ourselves in without prior warning here in the UK.

For IF a safety device is to be 'a new design' it will - or at least should be - of necessity be a very different design process to that used when designing almost any other item, as very different priorities will need to be taken into account.

Personally, I think the greatest risk to cyclists will be the rapid growth in silent electric vehicles. An early warning system for those could be very helpful.

I agree - but want to point out that the silent approach of electric vehicles is a risk to many road users, not just cyclists, and - sadly - I suspect strongly that a 'detection/early warning gizmo' would entail the fitting of the gizmo's counterpart to all e-vehicles - it couldn't merely be a stand-alone 'thingie' the vulnerable road user can carry. So we're back to the 'changes in the cars and/or drivers' thing once again ...

 

[HobbesOnTour]

Surely designing something that will inevitably be of doubtful efficacy and that has already been thought of is ... well, useless.

My understanding is that most of these projects are graded not on the usefulness of the product but on the process of the project.

Tens of thousands of these projects take place every year.

While I agree with most of your points perhaps advocacy is a better place for such a discussion rather than research and questionnaires?

 

[KnittyNorah]

My understanding is that most of these projects are graded not on the usefulness of the product but on the process of the project.

Tens of thousands of these projects take place every year.

While I agree with most of your points perhaps advocacy is a better place for such a discussion rather than research and questionnaires?

Well, the OP stated in their initial post that they are

taking on the task of improving Commuter cyclist safety for my Final Year Project.

and that their

aim is to create a product that will reduce the occurrence of cyclist accidents in the urban commuter environment.

So as there are already tens of thousands of 'safety products for cyclists' - few of which show any evidence they actually improve safety, consistently and/or in the real world in which we find ourselves, foggy winter nights, silent electric cars and all - a courageous designer or design student would do well to step outside that well-worn box and design a product that truly advances the safety of cyclists by fitting on the road itself, on the inside or outside of motor vehicles, or which is worn in some way by the drivers of such, given that it is the motorised users of roads who are the biggest and most consistent threat to all the other, perfectly legitimate, users.

 

[Once a Wheeler]

As many have mentioned, hi-viz is now mainstream but, in my experience, hi-viz da-glo socks are particularly effective as the up-and-down movement catches the motorist's eye and leads them to pay more attention.

Hi-tech is tricky but one possible system is for cyclists to carry a Recco transponder and motor vehicles, perhaps only HGVs and buses, to be obliged to carry an active Recco transmitter which will show or sound a warning when a cyclist is nearby. The system was developed to find people covered by avalanches or just lost in the wild. The passive transponder which the cyclist would wear lasts a lifetime and weighs less than 10 grammes. Obvious counter-aguments are that it would add cost to motor vehicles, would show a warning more or less permanently when there are many cyclists about and would probably enrage many motorists. Perhaps it could be developed in a positive way by increasing directionality, adjusting range, limiting the classes of vehicle that would carry it and so on—certainly worth a look for the purposes of your project. More info here.

 

[classic33]

Yet more gizmos and gadgets intended to be used by the cyclist would seem to be 'overkill' - have any of them been independently proven to give a significant improvement in safety, over and above the basics of good lighting and riding to a standard appropriate to the situation? is my question. I fear we will soon be so very burdened by what we are expected to both wear and carry in the way of unproven and even ineffective safety devices that we'll all need electric wheels to help us both carry and power the range of safety devices which surround and enclose us!

Surely it would be better by far to aim research, and hence the next generation of devices intended to protect the vulnerable road user, at the main factor which causes this vulnerability - the ICE or E driver in the heavy metal can. If something constructive wrt this could be done, it would protect every vulnerable road user, not just the person using a specific device marketed to a single section of the 'vulnerable user' population.

To be fair, all these projects aimed at cycling, seem to treat the cyclist as the one who can change things.

Maybe those setting these projects could have a quick read of the various threads for similar products before setting the project.

 

[All uphill]

My understanding is that most of these projects are graded not on the usefulness of the product but on the process of the project.

Tens of thousands of these projects take place every year.

While I agree with most of your points perhaps advocacy is a better place for such a discussion rather than research and questionnaires?

You are clearly right @HobbesOnTour that this is a project for a specific purpose - to demonstrate an ability to follow a brief and show a creative response. At the same time I think it is reasonable for us to reply genuinely to what is asked of us.

Maybe the OP would get a bonus point if they mentioned the importance of identifying the source of danger, and different possible approaches to addressing the problem of cyclist vulnerability?

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Yes, my suggestion was for a cycling-specific variant of such things. But I have no real idea what that would look like, or how it would gather its info.

Its a feed from Google into one networks summary. Based on anon phone data for those who leave mobile data on.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

I saw a guy riding one of those laser projection bikelane things. In daylight it was not visible.

So how did you know he had one if you couldn’t see it?

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Personally, I think the greatest risk to cyclists will be the rapid growth in silent electric vehicles. An early warning system for those could be very helpful.

I thought electric vehicles are meant to emit an engine like noise? Besides which they are hardly silent, the tyres on the road make quite a noise.

 

[HobbesOnTour]

To be fair, all these projects aimed at cycling, seem to treat the cyclist as the one who can change things.

Maybe those setting these projects could have a quick read of the various threads for similar products before setting the project.

I wouldn't be so sure that the projects are issued from up on high with specific products in mind. I'd imagine the students have a fair degree of choice within certain limits. The OP is a commuter and MTBer. I'm thinking they have chosen this specific project themselves - but I could be wrong.

A bike product is handy because bikes are simple devices, most people have access to one and probably have experience on one.
A prototype is easily tested in the real world.