Where were the women?

[chap]

Cycling advocacy is something very close to my heart.

In relation to London there are several factors. I think the rising costs of public transport in combination with the ease of using a bike and the C2W schemes have really pushed things in a positive direction. However, the one thing that also got people cycling was the tube bombings as there was a massive spike after then, this is according to a friend that works in the industry.

I think that the availability of cycling specific items should be determined by the people that want them and not through being pushed onto people. That I understand is a very grey area.

Odd however that cycling is percieved as not safe- if we're talking re statistics (which are in no way perfect) cycling is very safe, but why do people think it's unsafe- esp those that feel that is a barrier to cycling for themselves.That is what interests me the most- perceived safety.

That is very true, I was about to mention it in a previous post advocating Cycling in London, but decided against it since it would have seemed rather distasteful given the background and context of my post.

Velorbis, were the company I was about to mention, they started up after the 7/7 bombings, and decided to approach the needs of the commuter. They have now done very well for theirselves, so much so that they are no longer a British company but appear to operate from Germany, and one of the Scandinavian countries. Personally though, I prefer a classic Pashley

The interesting thing is that few operate on the rational of statistics, and infact few understand the limitations of them. If you have the choice of driving in a comfortable car, listening to music, adjusting the temperature to your satisfaction, only to occasionally come across some nutter who could cause a crash (read that as something which would be more of an inconvienience a opposed to a fatal); then you would perceive that to be safer than exposing yourself to the elements and being vulnerable as a kebab of meat scewered on bone, battling for space against cunky steel objects (some 2 story) which can accelerate very easily and be conservative in their braking.

Flesh and bone is no match for steel. Especially, 2 tonnes of it with a numpty behind the wheel.

 

[ttcycle]

The interesting thing is that few operate on the rational of statistics, and infact few understand the limitations of them. If you have the choice of driving in a comfortable car, listening to music, adjusting the temperature to your satisfaction, only to occasionally come across some nutter who could cause a crash (read that as something which would be more of an inconvienience a opposed to a fatal); then you would perceive that to be safer than exposing yourself to the elements and being vulnerable as a kebab of meat scewered on bone, battling for space against cunky steel objects (some 2 story) which can accelerate very easily and be conservative in their braking.

Flesh and bone is no match for steel. Especially, 2 tonnes of it with a numpty behind the wheel.

These words are very similar to some uttered by members of my family who are the car users who drive 5 minutes to get somewhere - it's shocking and they wonder why they are all rotund and unhealthy! I think part of the solution is to get people out and riding with people they know to learn good skills that you first maybe learn as a learner driver but on the bike- might be easier to do this with a friend ie anticipation, defensive riding, good positioning and assetive riding.

In fact with one of my housemates a few years ago, she needed to commute from South London up to Angel for work, I let her borrow my little folder and accompanied her on a trial run up to Angel- she still rides now even though a crappy motorist rear ended her and buckled the wheel on a bike of hers. Less of an enthusiast unlike me but she rides none the less.

 

[chap]

These words are very similar to some uttered by members of my family who are the car users who drive 5 minutes to get somewhere - it's shocking and they wonder why they are all rotund and unhealthy! I think part of the solution is to get people out and riding with people they know to learn good skills that you first maybe learn as a learner driver but on the bike- might be easier to do this with a friend ie anticipation, defensive riding, good positioning and assetive riding.

In fact with one of my housemates a few years ago, she needed to commute from South London up to Angel for work, I let her borrow my little folder and accompanied her on a trial run up to Angel- she still rides now even though a crappy motorist rear ended her and buckled the wheel on a bike of hers. Less of an enthusiast unlike me but she rides none the less.

That is a very good way to go, and I commend you on that, nothing begets confidence than facing the obstacle - a test run is as close to perfection that one is likely to get on this front.

LCC did do a little scheme like this, which was actually a very sensible idea, they had a 'commuting bus' or whatever, basically 2 volunteers - one at the front, one at the back of a group of commuters which started at some outward location and then made their way into the centre of London.

I don't know how scalable and sustainable this is, so the nearest thing would be encouraging more until they reach a critical mass. If there were known lines of cycle commuters, then the less confident would feel more safe in joining them. They in turn, may do as you did for their friends, family, and colleagues.

Presently, I imagine most people would focus on the part of the story which mentions what happened to your friends wheel. Now a similar experience in a car would simply mean they scuffed the bumper.

 

[brokenbetty]

Odd however that cycling is percieved as not safe- if we're talking re statistics (which are in no way perfect) cycling is very safe, but why do people think it's unsafe- esp those that feel that is a barrier to cycling for themselves.That is what interests me the most- perceived safety.

I think the publicity given to cycling deaths in London doesn't help. Of course every death is one too many and I fully understand why cycling groups use the publicity a death generates to push for improving bike safety /driver awareness, but the perception created is that cycling is dangerous and kills people.

It's that weird distortion whereby an event is newsworthy because it's out of the ordinary, yet people take events on the news as representative.

It would be great if as much effort spent on lobbying for improved safety was spent on publicising how safe cycling is already.

 

[al78]

Flesh and bone is no match for steel. Especially, 2 tonnes of it with a numpty behind the wheel.

Yes, but it is important to note that the two tonnes of steel is controlled by a human being with the same regard for human life as you and me, and thus the last thing they want to do is kill someone with their vehicle.

In fact, their desire and skill at not killing people is what ultimately results in statistics demonstrating how safe cycling is in the first place.

For those few that are really careless, it is nearly always possible to see events unfolding in front of you in advance and thus be prepared to take evasive action. It does take a finite amount of time for a vehicle to move from where it is to actually hitting you.

 

[chap]

I think the publicity given to cycling deaths in London doesn't help. Of course every death is one too many and I fully understand why cycling groups use the publicity a death generates to push for improving bike safety /driver awareness, but the perception created is that cycling is dangerous and kills people.

It's that weird distortion whereby an event is newsworthy because it's out of the ordinary, yet people take events on the news as representative.

It would be great if as much effort spent on lobbying for improved safety was spent on publicising how safe cycling is already.

That is interesting, many cycling advocates I have spoken to oft bewail the lack of publicity surrounding such events, and take it as a mark of indifference.

It would be good if cycling was advertised as safe but then the plain fact is that it just is not perceived as such, especially when one hears that some poor and experienced lady cyclist has been crushed to death by an articulated lorry in the city centre. If I was a politician I wouldn't touch such a claim of safety with a 10ft pole, if I was listening to such a politician, I would probably support touching them (hard) with a 10 ft pole

London is getting better for cycling, although there are changes which still need to be done. (Cue selfish and shameless promotion for my own thread) When rolled across the country, this is even more evident, that the serious lack of proper and honest facilities for the pedestrian and cyclist are a major unsustainable issue, that really ought to be tackled now.

 

[marinyork]

LCC did do a little scheme like this, which was actually a very sensible idea, they had a 'commuting bus' or whatever, basically 2 volunteers - one at the front, one at the back of a group of commuters which started at some outward location and then made their way into the centre of London.

I don't know how scalable and sustainable this is, so the nearest thing would be encouraging more until they reach a critical mass. If there were known lines of cycle commuters, then the less confident would feel more safe in joining them. They in turn, may do as you did for their friends, family, and colleagues.

They are common in other cities.

 

[chap]

They are common in other cities.

Sorry? The critical mass, commuter 'trains', or is there something I have missed?

 

[ttcycle]

I think Marin means the commuter trains.

The tide is changing but it's about looking at the barriers to cycling as well as looking at successes that have increased cycling take up. I think London is not representative of other cities/parts of the UK in many fronts esp with the number of cyclists as there are more cyclists now then there ever was- however, the percentage is something as low as 1% of journeys made by bike.

The important thing is to capitalise on the media reportage around HGV deaths to push for change - it's about leverage in a campaign for cycling and this can be used to instigate changes higher up the food chain to effect the larger changes. There is also a lot of misinformation and misperceptions which make people assume cycling is inherently unsafe

 

[chap]

I think Marin means the commuter trains.

The tide is changing but it's about looking at the barriers to cycling as well as looking at successes that have increased cycling take up. I think London is not representative of other cities/parts of the UK in many fronts esp with the number of cyclists as there are more cyclists now then there ever was- however, the percentage is something as low as 1% of journeys made by bike.

The important thing is to capitalise on the media reportage around HGV deaths to push for change - it's about leverage in a campaign for cycling and this can be used to instigate changes higher up the food chain to effect the larger changes. There is also a lot of misinformation and misperceptions which make people assume cycling is inherently unsafe

Ah, well that certainly is good news if other towns and cities have adopted commuter trains. Do you know of any? This could be a handy bit of research.

I do think that London is a perfect example for many towns and cities, once again mentioned in my thread (shameless I know ) It is large enough, yet small enough (boroughs) to be representative. The quality and standard between boroughs varies dramatically, and in between you have just about every architectural, and town planning style that has ever hit the nation. There is enough politics going on around the city to count for the EU, let alone Britain, so it isn't quite the metropolis of out beyond yonder that it is often portrayed to be.

That certainly is the case surrounding these preventable tragedies, this would ensure that they did not die in vein and that people know that they shall be held accountable. Remember when Boris came across a situation that could have wiped out an entire line of cyclists, what has come of that?

 

[ttcycle]

I do think that London is a perfect example for many towns and cities, once again mentioned in my thread (shameless I know ) It is large enough, yet small enough (boroughs) to be representative. The quality and standard between boroughs varies dramatically, and in between you have just about every architectural, and town planning style that has ever hit the nation. There is enough politics going on around the city to count for the EU, let alone Britain, so it isn't quite the metropolis of out beyond yonder that it is often portrayed to be.

I think London is (wrongly or rightly) seen as the city to look to for cycling initiative to trial before rolling them out nationwide or elsewhere.

However, there needs to be consideration in the demographics of inhabitants of the capital, what gets them cycling will be different to what gets someone cycling in a rural area. The population density is also different as well as the jobs, ethicity etc of londoners. This all adds to the picture of cycling, no matter how small and irrelevant it all seems - these grains of sand all contribute. It is too simplistic to make a blueprint from a London centric experiment and expect it to apply fully outside of the capital. More work needs to be done to look at cycling attitudes and provisions in other areas

 

[marinyork]

Sorry? The critical mass, commuter 'trains', or is there something I have missed?

Erm well other places have CM, it's not quite the same thing but then again what is. Commuter trains certainly happen. Whether you think they do any good, specifically the one in my city is a matter of opinion and philosophy. This city has got a lot more serious things the last year on related matters to this although I'm not really wanting to go into that area as you've already managed to wind up crankarm elsewhere on exactly that topic.

 

[chap]

I think London is (wrongly or rightly) seen as the city to look to for cycling initiative to trial before rolling them out nationwide or elsewhere.

However, there needs to be consideration in the demographics of inhabitants of the capital, what gets them cycling will be different to what gets someone cycling in a rural area. The population density is also different as well as the jobs, ethicity etc of londoners. This all adds to the picture of cycling, no matter how small and irrelevant it all seems - these grains of sand all contribute. It is too simplistic to make a blueprint from a London centric experiment and expect it to apply fully outside of the capital. More work needs to be done to look at cycling attitudes and provisions in other areas

Without reducing this to a imature debate, I hope you do not seriously think that ones ethnicity plays a role in these things. If so, then we could wrongfully extrapolate that the 'indigenous' Brit is naturally disinclined to cycle - not based on their past, but the overall picture of the present.

The job and setting would place more relevance on the debate. The fact that London, generally, is well connected, as opposed to many towns, villages, and cities is also key. E.g. I can get from Chelsea to Hampstead without having to trek through a forest.

This forms another dimension, based on liveability, how close on is to their resources. I am more focused on traffic, and road patterns to be honest. In cases where one lives several miles from any resources such as shops, doctors, or banks, then the cyclability of their part remains lower priority in the overall picture nations problem - although cycle lanes and speed controls could work wonders there.

To add to that, I would also state that we have York, Cambridge, and Oxford to add to the equation.

 

[chap]

Erm well other places have CM, it's not quite the same thing but then again what is. Commuter trains certainly happen. Whether you think they do any good, specifically the one in my city is a matter of opinion and philosophy. This city has got a lot more serious things the last year on related matters to this although I'm not really wanting to go into that area as you've already managed to wind up crankarm elsewhere on exactly that topic.

Hmm that conclusion is bordering on unnecessary, but I am glad to see that the Commuter trains are well practised elsewhere across the country. Like yourself, I do not know how effective they are, I don't think that they are particularly scalable, but nonetheless a good thing to advocate whilst it lasts.

 

[marinyork]

Hmm that conclusion is bordering on unnecessary, but I am glad to see that the Commuter trains are well practised elsewhere across the country. Like yourself, I do not know how effective they are, I don't think that they are particularly scalable, but nonetheless a good thing to advocate whilst it lasts.

Well the one round here, runs on an incredibly unimaginative easy peasy well established commuter route where you often see other cyclists - sometimes quite a few. So you end up saying what causes these people to cycle, the people living there are likely to see other people on their bikes and say well I could get down into town instead of getting the bus so you will have some people interested. On the other hand might these people work it out for themselves? Why not run the train somewhere else? On the other hand I know for a fact as I've seen it that people say I'm x from this area and I was thinking of commuting into town, can you send me some routes/who to talk to etc. Additionally to that there seem to be quite a few unconfident cyclists as it's one of the few places where I see people hopping on the pavement.

A similar argument can be made for a person who has been made salaried to try and encourage people to get to work and this sort of thing. One could argue it is poor value for money from a taxpayer's perspective, especially if you know that your council has just junked a proper "dream" secure cycle parking facility for similar running costs to the hired hands.