Why does cycling have a 'high' risk rating? or does it?

[Red Light]

Hmmmm. Could they be safer because very few Boris bikers wear helmets?

From my observation they are safer because they are unpredictable - you can see drivers being more cautious around them and giving them more room in a "not sure what are they going to do" sort of way.

 

[lukesdad]

Hmmmm. Could they be safer because very few Boris bikers wear helmets?

no its cos most of them are ridden round the london parks

 

[Red Light]

Yeah, you said that before: I followed your tips, posted the resulting experiences in the "fear of road riding" thread .... go, have a read and a laugh.

Yes you did but three things stand out from that thread. You have only been riding on the roads for a month which is not long. When you first posted two and a half weeks ago you had feelings of dread riding on the roads but by ten days ago by sticking with it you were starting to feel comfortable at non-peak times. That rate of progress is good. Probably the only difference between you and me is I have been doing it a lot longer so am much further up the comfort curve in traffic than you are at present. But it will come with time.

 

[lukesdad]

Do you have a source for that?

A ha ! Adrian as it happens I do... Me.

 

[lukesdad]

...and funnily enough most of them seemed to be lying on the grass in said parks, whilst their pilots endulged in all sorts of weird and wonderful activitys near by.

 

[Pat "5mph"]

...and funnily enough most of them seemed to be lying on the grass in said parks, whilst their pilots endulged in all sorts of weird and wonderful activitys near by.

What a marvel! Here, lying in the park next to their owners, you will find vast quantities of alcoholic beverages ....

 

[lukesdad]

Wish we had parks to lie in.

 

[smutchin]

Maybe not in Glasgow but the experience of Dublinbikes is similar - 3 million journeys to date and no serious injuries there either.

I was in Dublin last week and I was struck by what a cycling-friendly city it is compared to London - there seems to be a lot more proper cycling infrastructure, for a start (ie properly separate bike lanes). And junctions seem to be much better designed from the point of view of cyclists and pedestrians than in London.

Of course, Dublin also has the advantage of big wide roads (in the Georgian bits anyway) and much lower traffic density.

The Dublinbikes look good too - not quite the behemoths we have in London.

d.

 

[Red Light]

I was in Dublin last week and I was struck by what a cycling-friendly city it is compared to London - there seems to be a lot more proper cycling infrastructure, for a start (ie properly separate bike lanes). And junctions seem to be much better designed from the point of view of cyclists and pedestrians than in London.

Of course, Dublin also has the advantage of big wide roads (in the Georgian bits anyway) and much lower traffic density.

The Dublinbikes look good too - not quite the behemoths we have in London.

d.

They also have the advantage of banning lorries from the city.

 

[ufkacbln]

I was in Dublin last week and I was struck by what a cycling-friendly city it is compared to London - there seems to be a lot more proper cycling infrastructure, for a start (ie properly separate bike lanes).

d.

I have a big problem with this. Cycle lanes are not in any way part of the road infrastructure, they are ghettos where those of a car-centric society want to place those they are excluding from the road user's society.

They are an all too easy sticking plaster to remove the victims rather than deal with the issues of sharing the road.......and unfortunately exacerbates the already poor situation by reinforcing the concept that cyclists don't "belong on the roads"

 

[Red Light]

I have a big problem with this. Cycle lanes are not in any way part of the road infrastructure, they are ghettos where those of a car-centric society want to place those they are excluding from the road user's society.

They are an all too easy sticking plaster to remove the victims rather than deal with the issues of sharing the road.......and unfortunately exacerbates the already poor situation by reinforcing the concept that cyclists don't "belong on the roads"

Also if you look at the construction of the cycle lane network in Dublin it led to a fall in cycling. The introduction of the Dublinbikes led to a big increase in cycling in contrast.

 

[smutchin]

I have a big problem with this. Cycle lanes are not in any way part of the road infrastructure, they are ghettos where those of a car-centric society want to place those they are excluding from the road user's society.

Yes and no... I take your point about ghettoisation of cyclists, but if you look at somewhere like Blackfriars Bridge, the introduction of cycle lanes (segregated by a foot-high kerb) has reduced the amount of roadspace available to other traffic, which hopefully discourages motorists from using that route. (Of course, the Blackfriars cycle lanes were a side effect of traffic reduction measures for other reasons rather than the result of pro-cycling policy, but the net result is the same and shows what could be done if the will were there.)

Even as a fearless Lycra-clad Urban Road Warrior who doesn't bat an eyelid at negotiating Elephant & Castle by bike, I would favour routes free of motor transport if I had the option.

However, I've taken note of Red Light's interesting point about the reduction of cycling in Dublin. The argument in favour of segregated lanes tends to be that more people would cycle if they had that protection. Maybe it's more complex than that...

They are an all too easy sticking plaster to remove the victims rather than deal with the issues of sharing the road.......and unfortunately exacerbates the already poor situation by reinforcing the concept that cyclists don't "belong on the roads"

...and this is why. Building proper infrastructure shouldn't be a standalone measure - it should be carried out in tandem with a campaign of education to improve the behaviour of motorists towards more vulnerable road users (pedestrians as well as cyclists), as well as further restrictions on motorists to make driving an even less attractive option in cities (and much stricter enforcement of traffic infringements by motorists).

So despite your valid concerns, I would be strongly in favour of more cycling infrastructure in London - as long as it were implemented in a way that genuinely promoted cycling and discouraged driving.

d.

 

[tyred]

The thing you need to remember about Irish cycle lanes is that their use is generally compulsory.

 

[smutchin]

The thing you need to remember about Irish cycle lanes is that their use is generally compulsory.

That's not a hardship when the facilities provided are so good, surely? It's not the same as if we were forced to cycle on the token bits of blue paint we have in London.

(Also, it's only compulsory to use them where they exist - I saw plenty of cyclists using the main carriageway on roads without cycle lanes, and even cyclists on the main road parallel to the cycle lane that runs along by the canal.)

d.

 

[tyred]

That's not a hardship when the facilities provided are so good, surely? It's not the same as if we were forced to cycle on the token bits of blue paint we have in London.

d.

I know a lot of people seem to complain about them, the same reasons I read about in the UK - broken bottles, poor surfaces, etc. I live a long way away from Dublin and have never used any of these facilities so won't comment myself. I agree, if they are well designed and go to places people want to travel to, then it's fine, I would be happy to use cycle paths myself but I don't believe it should be compulsory in towns. Alongside busy highspeed routes, maybe, but not in a normal urban environment.