Roads 'too dangerous' for cyclists BBC poll suggests

[John the Monkey]

Much as I'd love to agree that every urban cyclist is the epitome of riding skills, or at least the majority are above the curve I see enough to cause doubt. Most are average, some are terrible, probably an equal number are great.

Possibly true in the city centre here (a large, churning student population sees to that). Once I get outside, not so much - I'd argue that you don't last long if you're careless, or if you're unlucky even, because not many are giving you much of a margin of error.

 

[w00hoo_kent]

So it's rare for you to see another cyclist and think 'I'd have done that differently' but common for you to think 'that was a really sensible thing to do'?

 

[John the Monkey]

So it's rare for you to see another cyclist and think 'I'd have done that differently' but common for you to think 'that was a really sensible thing to do'?

More or less.

In the city centre, I've seen a fair bit of stuff that makes me wince (especially during term time). It's mitigated by low traffic speeds and improving cycle facilities on the stretch I ride. (Oxford Road between the car wash and Whitworth Park is much better this year, for example - traffic islands stop cars/busses encroaching on the mandatory lane (which has also been widened). Prior to that, busses would begin to move left towards stops some 100-50 metres distant, and there was a lot of iffy undertaking happening as a result. Cars would simply drift over, I guess as the driver lost focus on what they were doing). I used to see a lot of red light running on pedestrian crossings (not especially dangerous (bikes are pretty easy to avoid, at least, compared to motor vehicles) but antisocial). Can't remember much of that recently though.

The other 10 or so miles, not really. If I got picky, I'd say I've seen some unnecessary filtering, and occasionally bad road positioning. The people I've seen/see more or less every day though, I'd struggle to find fault with. There are a couple of people I wish would either call their overtakes, or pass wider (as I've moaned about elsewhere).

I doubt we've seen the surge in cycling that, by all accounts, London has though - I suspect our cycling population is smaller, and churning somewhat more slowly.

 

[ufkacbln]

26 yr old, three teenagers in the car, maybe Operation Yewtree should take a look...

You just have to hope the court had a lot more info. There are some twisty bits to that road, plus dips and people do just pull over. From the info we gave it sounds suspect though.

A good friend is a paramedic in Oxford, his tales of peoples behaviour when they are on blues & twos are quite scary. Unfortunately, being Oxford, a lot of them involve cyclists.

I am well known to the local Ambulances.

Clear signal, pull to kerb and maintain signal until they are past... that way my intentions are crystal clear and unequivocal

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Genuine mistake as decided by the jury, ar an appallingly bad driver who failed to take the most basic precautions before manoeuvring his car into the path of one of the most visible and audible vehicles on the road with fatal consequences?

Superficially it would seem the jurors were of the "We're all drivers, there but for the grace of God, there was nothing more he could have done, it's just a tragic "accident", we can't bring back the dead so let's not ruin another life." school.

The feckers.

 

[GrasB]

In 2012 you were 11 times more likely to be cycling in an urban area, but 97% less likely to be killed, 91% less likely to be seriously injured and 87% less likely to be any type of casualty. I got to these figures by dividing the K/S/I figure for the road type by the sum of the K/S/I figures per million miles for both roads. i.e.: 0.01039524 killed/million urban miles divided by (0.01039524 + 0.3633512459 killed/milion rural) = 2.78%. I am not completely sure I have described the function of this correctly nor if the actual description of the function is meaningless. Maybe someone could clarify. Please don't go quoting this until someone's told me off or told me I'm right :-)

I've always wondered how heavy the under reporting of less serious injury cycling incidents is in urban areas. On a nearly daily basis I hear about someone being knocked off their bikes on Cambridge roads. It's always things like "they're okay, just grazed their arm..." type discussions & almost certainly nether the driver not the cyclist would have reported the collision. With this in mind it wouldn't surprise me if there was a much higher under reporting of minor incidents in urban areas than rural areas purely because collisions in rural areas tend to hurt more.

Also I'm also certain that when my arm got fractured due to being thwacked with a wing mirror it never got reported with my actual injury as it took several weeks before I worked out my arm wasn't just bruised & went to the GP about it.

It would also be interesting to see the results plotted in incidents per 1000 riding hours. I'm aware it'd be almost impossible to work this out but I have a feeling it would make for interesting reading.

 

[marknotgeorge]

Superficially it would seem the jurors were of the "We're all drivers, there but for the grace of God, there was nothing more he could have done, it's just a tragic "accident", we can't bring back the dead so let's not ruin another life." school.

The feckers.

Not feckers so much as human beings. I think what's needed is proper direction of juries so that they stick to the bare facts of the case, and are not swayed by the there for the grace of God argument.