Motorcycles in bus lanes...

[Riding in Circles]

catrike I posted clear evidence that despite their relative scarcity PTW's hurt and kill cyclists out of proportion.


You posted ROSPA stats that don't even mention PTWs.


I know what I would choose to believe.

You copied and pasted something from a site with a clear agenda, I posted something with no clear agenda, the ROSPA figures come from the 2004 Road casualties Great Britain report which if you read it is a very complete document, with lots of interesting data, I was basically posting incomplete info the same as you were just to point out the trouble with it, if you cannot or will not see past that then so be it.

 

[Jaded]

What relevance does 30+ miles have? Or is that more bollocks?

 

[Riding in Circles]

What relevance does 30+ miles have? Or is that more bollocks?

He is talking about people who commute in from outside of London but I do not see how allowing them motorcycle access to the bus lanes will actually encourage more to use motorcycles, if more used motorcycles then the roads would be better anyway.

 

[spindrift]

You copied and pasted something from a site with a clear agenda

They are TRL and Dept OT figures. If you dispute them, say why.


I posted something with no clear agenda, the ROSPA figures come from the 2004 Road casualties


That, for the fifth time, didn't even mention PTW casualty rates and was therefore irrelevant.

 

[spindrift]

if more used motorcycles then the roads would be better anyway.

"Better" is an off word to use, given that PTWs have a greater chance of hurting cyclists than cars, despite there being fewer of them.

Why is placing cyclists in danger "better"?

 

[Riding in Circles]

The report it comes from includes PTW's. If you are posting figures then post links to the source of those figures. That is first time you have given a source.

 

[LLB]

My brother in law spends 3 hours a day on public transport commuting from St Albans to the City. If I were in his position, I'd be looking at other alternatives, It is a mega commute on a cycle 5 days a week, and whilst there are plenty on here who could do it, many would just not entertain doing it in all weathers. I wouldn't entertain doing it on 4 wheels at all.

 

[Jaded]

He is talking about people who commute in from outside of London but I do not see how allowing them motorcycle access to the bus lanes will actually encourage more to use motorcycles, if more used motorcycles then the roads would be better anyway.

It just seems odd to take one particular distance and use that to illustrate a biased point.

I think I agree with you that it won't necessarily encourage motorcycle use, however I can definitely see it put off more timid cyclists.

 

[Riding in Circles]

I'm sorry Catrike - but the RoSPA figures you gave relate clearly to cars - not to all motor vehicles. The second paragraph makes this clear:

"This information sheet outlines what measures can, and are, being taken to improve the design of cars so that drivers are less likely to hit pedestrians in the first place, and so that when such collisions do happen, the pedestrian will suffer less severe injuries."

The figures you gave may be an extract from a wider report but you haven't given the other figures.

T

Actually I have given quite a lot of the other figures in subsequent posts, the report I have quoted and as quoted by ROSPA is the same report relied upon by the source spindrift quoted, so if my statistics are no good then neither are his, that's simple and agreed by your own rules.

I notice he didn't report on the 210 pedestrians hit by pedal cycles, 1 of which was killed and 42 seriously injured.

Or in the collisions between motorcycles and pedal cycles where 18 motorcyclists were seriously injured.

Your figures are somewhat disingenuous as reported from the site copied.

 

[Riding in Circles]

if more used motorcycles then the roads would be better anyway.

"Better" is an off word to use, given that PTWs have a greater chance of hurting cyclists than cars, despite there being fewer of them.

Why is placing cyclists in danger "better"?

I meant the roads would be clearer so negating the need for motorcycles to use bus lanes.

 

[Riding in Circles]

I haven't given any figures... do keep up!

I meant spindrift, as you well know.

 

[spindrift]

That is first time you have given a source.

Mate, you've only just arrived here:

http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=13248

 

[Riding in Circles]

That is first time you have given a source.

Mate, you've only just arrived here:

http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=13248

I meant on this thread, but yes I am a recent member here, I was on the cycling plus forum many moons ago but it died and became Bikeradar I think.

 

[spindrift]

Kindly peruse that thread and the evidence posted. The LCC opposed this move. The CTC opposed this move. People have studied the trials, considered the negative effect especially on novice riders who are going to have to be enticed onto the roads for the cycling boom to continue, people used to dealing with figures. The move places people in harm's way for little discernible reward to anyone. This isn't an anti-motorbike issue, it's pro-road safety and we all know that more cyclists means safer roads.

There's still time for Boris to listen to sense and stop ignoring the cyclists who voted him in, I have confidence he'll make the right choice, in between shagging his interns.

 

[Riding in Circles]

I don't disagree with not allowing the use of bus lanes by motorcycles as you will see if you read my other posts, and for good reason, motorcycles and bicycles just do not mix, we are the most vulnerable group of road users, we can hold our own with the busses just because they are slow-ish. Having a Hayabusa that accelerates from 0-60 in 2 seconds and weighs 500lbs at rest in the same space as a bicycle is a recipe for disaster both on safety grounds and because the two groups will invariably vie for superiority.