Motorcycles in bus lanes...

[spindrift]

• Dangerous to themselves and to others. Motorcyclists place not only themselves at risk, but they are also disproportionately hazardous to pedestrians' and cyclists' safety as well. Per mile travelled, PTWs are about 1.5 as likely as cars to be involved in collisions which cause serious injury to cyclists, twice as likely to be involved in causing them serious injuries and about three times as likely to be involved in killing them.
• Polluting. Compared with cars per vehicle-km travelled, PTWs emit 11.3 times as much methane, 6.3 times as much carbon monoxide, 9 times as much volatile organic compounds (VOCs other than methane), 7.2 times as much benzene, 12 times as much 1,3 butadeine and 8.2 times as much particulate matter. They are also a lot noisier. The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution stated that "Although motorcycles, mopeds and scooters, take up less road space than cars, we have not received any information that would indicate that they would have an environmental advantage over cars in other respects".
• A threat to pro-cycling policies. Encouraging more motorcycle use will undermine efforts to promote cycling, not only because those switching to motorcycling might otherwise have switched to a healthier, safer and cleaner alternative (e.g. cycling) but also by adding to the risk faced by those who do cycle or who might be thinking about doing so.

 

[Riding in Circles]

I think I would like to see some valid statistics of the accident figures.

 

[LLB]

• Dangerous to themselves and to others. Motorcyclists place not only themselves at risk, but they are also disproportionately hazardous to pedestrians' and cyclists' safety as well. Per mile travelled, PTWs are about 1.5 as likely as cars to be involved in collisions which cause serious injury to cyclists, twice as likely to be involved in causing them serious injuries and about three times as likely to be involved in killing them.
• Polluting. Compared with cars per vehicle-km travelled, PTWs emit 11.3 times as much methane, 6.3 times as much carbon monoxide, 9 times as much volatile organic compounds (VOCs other than methane), 7.2 times as much benzene, 12 times as much 1,3 butadeine and 8.2 times as much particulate matter. They are also a lot noisier. The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution stated that "Although motorcycles, mopeds and scooters, take up less road space than cars, we have not received any information that would indicate that they would have an environmental advantage over cars in other respects".
• A threat to pro-cycling policies. Encouraging more motorcycle use will undermine efforts to promote cycling, not only because those switching to motorcycling might otherwise have switched to a healthier, safer and cleaner alternative (e.g. cycling) but also by adding to the risk faced by those who do cycle or who might be thinking about doing so.

Link ? Ignore lists are for chickens Tabernacle

 

[spindrift]

Motorcyclists represent a large proportion of road casualties in relation to their numbers. They make up less than 1% of road traffic, but suffer 14% of deaths and serious injuries.

Official statistics indicate that pedestrians are involved in a higher proportion of collisions per mile with PTWs than cars.

In 2004, there were 1,059 pedestrians hit by a motorcycle. Of these:
· 20 were killed, and
· 229 were seriously injured [1]
There were no bikers killed in these collisions. [2]
In the same year, there were 253 collisions involving a pedal cycle and motorcycle. Of these:
· There were 226 pedal cyclist casualties
· One pedal cyclist was killed, and
· 35 pedal cyclists were seriously injured [3]
There were no bikers killed in these collisions. [4]
The fact that there were no bikers killed in any of these incidents shows that regardless of blame, people on foot or bikes come off worse in crashes with motorcycles.
Although motorbikes pose a much lesser risk to people on foot and on bicycles than cars do, the figures above show that they do injure and kill people.

How do motorcyclists put their own lives and others’ at risk on the road? The types of crash involving motorbikes are often different to those involving cars. Department for Transport research has shown that motorbike crashes are particularly likely to involve loss of control on bends, or overtaking manoeuvres.[5]
Excessive speed is more likely to be a factor in motorcycle crashes than crashes involving any other vehicle.
Exceeding the speed limit or driving too fast for the conditions are contributory factors for one in eight motorcycles that crash (13%), but are only contributory factors for one in ten cars (10%) and one in 17 trucks (6%) that crash.[6]

http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=920

 

[Riding in Circles]

I think more people are killed by cars than motorcycles, just some quick math between these figures and ROSPA's figures say it all.

ROSPA

 

[spindrift]

I think more people are killed by cars than motorcycles, just some quick math between these figures and ROSPA's figures say it all.

ROSPA

Take a look at that link, again, I've no idea why you've posted this irrelevance. Despite there being far fewer PTWs, the accident rate is disproportionately high.

 

[Riding in Circles]

It is not irrelevant, it is data, you can never have to much data.

I know you want to demonise PTW's to get this proposed legislation dropped but you still have to use balanced and checkable data, otherwise you just look like a one trick pony with a bee in his bonnet and no one takes you seriously.

You have time on your hands right now, use it, take the ROSPA data, find the real source of the PTW data, correlate it against percentages of different vehicle types and then post your findings with all the evidence backing it up about the pro rata dangers of PTW's.

Maybe then I will see you as being credible, until then I will keep shooting you down.

 

[spindrift]

It is not irrelevant

You posted that cars kill more people than motorbikes. This has sod all to do with anything because, as at least two posters have explained to you already, the danger posed is disproportionately high for PTWs, that's why sharuing road space with cyclists is such a bad idea.

I know you want to demonise PTW's to get this proposed legislation dropped but you still have to use balanced and checkable data

I'm not demonising anyone, I'm posting the hard evidence. I did use checkable data, please read the TRL research above.

You have time on your hands right now, use it, take the ROSPA data, find the real source of the PTW data, correlate it against percentages of different vehicle types and then post your findings

I already have. You haven't read the whole thread, have you?


And the ROSPA link doesn't even mention PTWs.


No cigar.

 

[Riding in Circles]

OK, perspective.

In 2004 there were 671 pedestrians killed in road traffic accidents, there were 134 cyclists killed, 585 motorcyclists killed, 1671 car users killed, 20 coach and bus users killed, 62 goods vehicle users killed.

So we can clearly see that motorcyclists are at more danger on the roads than cyclists, so maybe cyclists should have to use the normal roads and then motorcyclists can use the bus lanes.

 

[spindrift]

So we can clearly see that motorcyclists are at more danger on the roads than cyclists,

No, we can't. This is basic maths, not even statistical analyses!

 

[LLB]

Ahem

PTWs and Pedestrian Casualties

1.08 Official statistics indicate that pedestrians are involved in a higher proportion of collisions per mile with PTWs than cars.

1.09 There is a need for further research in this area. However, Booth’s study (Characteristics of Urban PTW Accidents. IMC 1989) suggests that in PTW/pedestrian collisions, pedestrians are primarily at fault in seven out of eight cases.

1.10 It is possible that a major factor in casualty figures could be pedestrians failing to take sufficient care to observe traffic movements when crossing the road. Whatever the factors involved, there is still a need to increase the awareness of PTWs among pedestrians, who should be encouraged to ‘think bike’ before crossing the road.
http://www.despatch.co.uk/nmc/safety.htm

 

[spindrift]

I like the way catrike's argument is demolished, he acknowledges nothing and then immediately posts:

"OK, Perspective"

followed by yet more irrelevant guff.

Very hostile and aggressive for a newbie poster too, I reckon someone's desperate to sneak in under my ignore list....


Plonk, you're on it catrike, I suspect an ulterior motive I'm afraid.

 

[Riding in Circles]

Throw in that there are an estimated 794,000 bicycles on the road in 2004 extrapolated from traffic figures and 1,060,000 motorcycles in use at the same time. So 25% more motorcycles yet nearly 5 times as many deaths. They are looking more vulnerable now aren't they? You see your figures are entirely subjective, you have quoted a single source and no relevant back up with regards usage.

 

[spindrift]

Catrike is linford, desperate for attention again. Same garbled syntax, same lack of comprehension when dealing with rudimentary stats, same obstinate refusal to listen to anybody, mr paul, can you trace ISPs?

 

[Riding in Circles]

To be on the ignore list of a self serving fool makes no difference to me, hope you get well soon though.