[Closed] So what do you think would improve safety for cyclists?

A proper driving test.

Significant measures to make a wholesale shift to cycling viable, showers at work, secure parking.
Once, let's say 30%, a large proportion of cars come off the road we can free up more space for bikes. If there are less cars, I would expect the pressures and stress to reduce making driving more pleasurable.
Cyclists win.
Drivers win.
Employers win.
Health service wins.
McDonalds lose (as everyone will have to change to healthier diets) 😀
Make cycling more attractive.

a fresh start from everyone.

a fresh start from everyone.

possibly one of the truest things ever spoken. From irritated self-righteous motorists right through to irritated self-righteous cyclists...

sadly, almost certainly impossible.

Seems people realy like legislation, so make it illegal to slide down the left hand side of any long vehicle, in the absence of a cycle lane, within 50yrds of a junction. Also make it a really serious offence to turn left through a cyclelane without signalling (pet hate from my commuting in Leeds days).

Oh where to start!

Fistly, it's a catch 22 situation. More people cycling on the road would improve safety but a lot of folk won't cycle on the road because they think it's not safe.

Also the blame has to be shared between motorists and cyclists. Yes, some motorists' driving is pretty bad around cyclists but the amount of cyclists that display a lack of any sort of road awareness is shocking. Training for both parties would help but I can't help but think a lot of cyclists, particularly younger ones, seem to have this idea it's just not cool to give clear signals.

Another major contributing factor IMO is badly thought out cycling lanes. There's a couple just round the corner from me that if ridden as suggested put you in the most dangerous riding position for that stretch of road.

no matter what we think, as a cyclist who commutes or rides on a regular basis, we will always be a minority.
the average british person is
A. very lazy
B. very stubborn

a man who goes to work 40 hours a week and pays his hard earned cash on his prized possession, which is usualy a car, will not leave it parked up and cycle to work.
it is his right to use that car no matter of cost or consequence.

A change in attitude towards cyclist is what's needed, maybe the Olympics might help in a small way.

On the other side of the coin, cyclist too need to take responsibility to for their actions, maybe a meeting in the middle will see a general improvement for us all for bike awareness.

1. Fewer cars on the road through a combination of increased taxation, legislation that limits the number of cars per household, increased tax credits for people who live within say 5 miles of their workplace and so on and so forth.
2. More public transport owned by public bodies that reflect the needs of the district they serve.
3. Designated car free zones in the centre of every city with congestion charging as a bare minimum for every city.
4. A massive investment into the rail network to move the balance of haulage off the roads.

if all this takes place (yeah, likely!) more people will ride bikes and less people will get squashed, regardless of what they wear on their heads.

it is his right to use that car no matter of cost or consequence.

wrong, no one has he 'right' to drive a car.

• A media campaign to highlight and unwind some of the biggest myths: "road tax", primary road position, safe overtaking, riding two abreast, gutter cycling, ASLs, parking on cycle lanes etc

• Massive investment in [i]proper[/i] cycling infrastructure - including plenty of segregated paths/lanes and more mandatory (i.e. no cars & no parking) cycle lanes. We hardly spend anything on cycling provision in the UK and what we do get is pathetic strips of unenforceable paint.

• More emphasis on cycling in the driving test. Ideally able-bodied drivers should be required to cycle at least one day.

• Return to teaching BikeAbility in schools as part of the national curriculum.

• secure public bike parking. All new buildings and all public car parks required by planning law to provide adequate secure bike parking.

yossarian

my comment was meant to be very very tongue in cheek....... 🙄

oh bollocks, so it is. sorry ton 🙂

showers at work

and to get more pootlers out on bikes we need a pleasent cycling environment. ie infrastructure and attitudes (on all sides)

So banning lycra on any journey less than 5 miles might work 😉

make it illegal to slide down the left hand side of any long vehicle, in the absence of a cycle lane, within 50yrds of a junction.

Sadly most cycle lanes actively encourage cyclists to go up the left of vehicles to make it to the ASL.

I would probally ban 90% of the Headcam heros,

Yes some of them are genuine cyclists who are honest and good riders but the other 90% are car hating activists.

The amount of video's i've seen on youtube where an accident could have been avoided but the cyclist is cocky or makes no effort to avoid the situation is amazing. These people are causing us as much problems as most drivers.

Expand the driving test to include a cycling section. Doesn't have to be tested but make one of the requirements that drivers spend a few hours on the road with a cycling instructor learning good cyclecraft.

Couple this with an advertising campaign to let non-cyclists know why we do what we do ie. why we don't hug the gutter all the time.

Another advertising campaign to show good cyclecraft.

don simon - Member

Significant measures to make a wholesale shift to cycling viable, showers at work, secure parking.
Once, let's say 30%, a large proportion of cars come off the road we can free up more space for bikes. If there are less cars, I would expect the pressures and stress to reduce making driving more pleasurable.
Cyclists win.
Drivers win.
Employers win.
Health service wins.
McDonalds lose (as everyone will have to change to healthier diets)
Make cycling more attractive.

+1

This won't making cycling any safer as motorised vehicle is always going to have more energy for than the cyclist can absord. Only segrated cycle lanes will make cycling safer and that won't happen for a long time. We already have roads in worse state than some 3rd world countries so I have no idea were we would find the money to pay for these. I know cyclist would pay for them and nor would motorists through increased taxation.

Singlespeed_Shep - Member
a fresh start from everyone.

Graham S - Bikeability in schools is a good start (I teach bikeability for a living so will always think it's a good idea). I'm always shocked though at the amount of kids I pass at level 2 who then don't get to put it into practice because their parents just won't allow them to cycle on road. More often than not it's because the parents don't cycle themselves, I'd like to see more family based bikeability courses introduced.

As Singlespeed Shep said up there ^^^ what's needed is a fresh start from everyone. That maybe unworkable but a sea change in those that cycle for transport is achievable. Some sort of campaign to get people off the pavements and onto the road would be a good start.

a fresh start from everyone

This.

[url= http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/ ]Times Cyclesafe campaign[/url]

Manifesto is pretty much there. Discussions since are finessing.

[url= http://lcc.org.uk/pages/go-dutch ]LCC Go Dutch[/url]

This discussion has kind of been done.

McDonalds lose (as everyone will have to change to healthier diets)

one of the biggest benefits of doing sport all the time is you can eat calorific shit without it being an issue, surely? 🙂

(not that McD's would be my food of choice, regardless though)

We already have roads in worse state than some 3rd world countries so I have no idea were we would find the money to pay for these.

Over 200,000 people a year are injured on the roads.

Money spent on reducing that figure is an [i]investment[/i].
One that repays itself with reduced bills for health care and benefits.

Segregation of cars and bikes.

Needs money and political will, but to me is the only long term solution. And by segregation, I do not mean some paint on a road to show where you will be when you get hit. I mean actual separate infrastructure.

I live near Milton Keynes, which has a proper separate cycling network. It's genius. Friends who live there can let their teenage kids go anywhere by bike without having to worry about them being safe on the roads. To me all the other things are great (educating drivers and cyclists etc.) but putting people on bikes in the same space as a ton of metal travelling at 60mph is never going to be safe no matter how much we try to educate. It's one of reasons I ride an MTB most of the time - I don't trust roads.

Give sustrans a f***load of money.

Every town center main road to get cycle lanes on both sides (there a few near me where your expected to ride on the pavement (and therefore give way at every junction, every 20m or so, and spend 50% of the time going the 'wrong' way).

Out of town every A-road linking poulated areas (i.e where between villages upto say 4 miles appart) should have cycle lanes on uphill sections where cyclists are most likely to be feeling vunerable and/or holding cars up. Unless there's a viable cycle route (i.e. b-roads or an old railway) in which case more blue signs to divert cyclists via quieter roads.*

Roads without a central white line so small B and C class roads) to get a default 30mph limit (easy to instigate, it's just the same as knowing the difference between DC and SC is 70 and 60, well if there's no dividing line the limit's 30).

Whilst bringin in the new rules make it clear they are for cyclists safety, and if death rate's don't improve they'll get more draconian (i.e. give 'drivers' and incentive not to squish cyclists)!

*theres a section on my commute which links one big (DC in places) A-road with another and goes to a steelworks. It's a mile of uphill and 50% of journeys involve at least one steel truck overtaking way too close on the climbs. As a result I've taken to doing a 3 mile diversion with a load more climbing just to avoid it! That's the kind of road that really needs a crawler lane for cyclists and doing so only on the climbs would mean we'd get twice as much done as trying to do it everywhere.

make it illegal to slide down the left hand side of any long vehicle, in the absence of a cycle lane, within 50yrds of a junction.

Sadly most cycle lanes actively encourage cyclists to go up the left of vehicles to make it to the ASL.

in the absense of a cycle lane... in my experience there aren't ususally cycle lanes leading to ASLs, they put an ASL in, but no way to get to it. 😐 (maybe places other than leeds are a bit better at this). I suppose you'd add a bit that would make you stop until long vehicles have pulled away if you're in a cycle lane with left turning traffic or... see this is why I hate legislation.

New Law: Drive sensibly, Ride Sensibly. Or Else.

The End.

edit: i thought you could do nested quotes here...

The main barrier to participation in cycling is a perceived lack of safety due to vehicles on the road.

Essentially everyone I know who doesn't ride a bike for recreation / exercise / fun / transport, is just too lazy or rightly-or-wrongly perceives the biggest barrier to participation as fitness. I'd guess the next step up the 'excuse list' would be the weather, followed by practicality/time issues.

I don't think education of drivers would be all that effective. The main thing which will change a driver's attitude is if they get on a bike themselves. Almost everything else follows from that. How did the Dutch do it?

I also think only designated cycle lanes would make an appreciable difference.
You will never educate some motorists to be more aware and many of the reckless, impatient drivers are selfish types who just don't care about other people and the rights and wrongs of their actions as long as they can make up a precious couple of seconds.
Sorry, but that's the truth of it.

The Dutch did it like this

Unfortunately I think there are going to be a lot more accidents from more people riding bikes before anyone really thinks about building proper cycle infrastructure in this country.

Essentially everyone I know who doesn't ride a bike for recreation / exercise / fun / transport, is just too lazy or rightly-or-wrongly perceives the biggest barrier to participation as fitness. I'd guess the next step up the 'excuse list' would be the weather, followed by practicality/time issues.

Everyone I know who doesn't cycle (but probably should) cites the danger as their main reason. Ironicaly I'd day say they were the worst drivers, especialy my missus who ironicaly thinks I'm a bad driver for not reacting to things she sees as a danger but I've spotted way in advance and already decided on speed/posiotion/timing so don't have to slam on the brakes, crash through the gears and finaly pass wayyyyyy to close, every time I approach a cyclist.

in my experience there aren't ususally cycle lanes leading to ASLs, they put an ASL in, but no way to get to it.

If you have to cross a solid white line at an ASL then it is not to spec and is technically encouraging you to break the law.

They should, by design, have a little cycle lane leading to them that doesn't cross the first white line. Sadly that usually goes up the left hand side.

Essentially everyone I know who doesn't ride a bike for recreation / exercise / fun / transport, is just too lazy or rightly-or-wrongly perceives the biggest barrier to participation as fitness.

Attitude is a big factor. This makes sad reading:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/jun/03/britons-unmoved-cycling-campaigns

no matter what we think, as a cyclist who commutes or rides on a regular basis, we will always be a minority.
the average british person is
A. very lazy
B. very stubborn

a man who goes to work 40 hours a week and pays his hard earned cash on his prized possession, which is usualy a car, will not leave it parked up and cycle to work.
it is his right to use that car no matter of cost or consequence.

impatient [b][u]cyclists[/b][/u] are selfish types who just don't care about other people and the rights and wrongs of their actions as long as they can make up a precious couple of seconds.
Sorry, but that's the truth of it.

Same goes on both sides. A truce needs to be called, and both sides need to grow up.

a lot of people think and also think if you ride a bike that you are a second class citizen that cannot afford a car

Sadly true. Enlightening reading the Grauniad Bike Blog the other day talking about the 80 folk over here for the Olympics as guests of the Dutch firm Pon, an automotive company. They brought their bikes and are cycling round the Olympic events, including the senior executive staff.

From the article: [i]"Van der Valk assures me that it is completely normal for a senior Dutch executive to cycle around town, though it is difficult to imagine British board-level executives – let alone automotive chiefs – doing the same."[/i]

-- http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/aug/01/bike-blog-dutch-olympics-games

Perhaps controversially, maybe more education for cyclists instead of automatically blaming drivers?

From an eye witness account of what happened last night:

As I was cycling home from work tonight a guy, maybe in his late 20's, was cycling level with me and as we approached a bus he went inside while I held back. The lights changed as he was in the buses blind spot and as he was attempting to go straight the bus turned left...

You can put all the blind spot mirrors and proximity alarms you like on buses and HGV's... but we as a cycling community also have to play our part!

Everyone I know who doesn't cycle (but probably should) cites the danger as their main reason.

Good, interesting range of responses. Certainly shows that there isn't a simple answer to this issue, but it does need to be addressed. Apart from the fatal accident statistics, the majority of cylists I know who ride on the road regularly have had at least one 'close encounter' and / or accident due to dangerous driving (and yes, in my mind that includes SMIDSY!) Equally, when I've been out riding with some of my friends who rare cycle on the road, I have been shocked by how they ride - in the gutter or wobbling across the road, unaware of the traffic around them etc.

Re the perception of safety as a barrier to cycling participation - this is not based on heresay, but one of the few population-level quantative surveys that have asked this question. Out of 19 different outdoor activities, cycling was the only one where 'safety' was a significant barrier (for the other activities, the main barriers were one's that are often related to 'lack of time' / 'bad weather' etc). So it certainly is a factor which deters greater participation in cylcing. Maybe a Catch 22 - if safety is only improved by more cycling, but more pople won't cycle becuase they don't feel safe ... where do we go from there?

impatient cyclists are selfish types who just don't care about other people and the rights and wrongs of their actions as long as they can make up a precious couple of seconds.
Sorry, but that's the truth of it.

Same goes on both sides. A truce needs to be called, and both sides need to grow up.

Yeah, I agree. I see cyclists on a daily basis doing things that will antagonise motorists, pedestrians and put themselves in danger. My comment was aimed at bad drivers, because they are usually more of a danger to a responsible cyclist than the cyclist himslef.

A large focussed media campaign would be a start.

To take the example of drink driving. I know that many people still do it but of people I know those of us around the 30yo mark have been heavily influenced by the campaign that was run by the government over many years (probably as we all started to drive and drink). It is normally the case that people will not drink anything if they are driving. It definately had an effect.

A similar campaign for cycling safety (aimed at all parties) could have a similar effect.

I would like to see a harder driving test and retesting.

I would like to see tougher sentences for people who kill and injur on the roads. This doesn not necessarily mean custodial sentences but automatic bans and compulsary extra training and retests.

More cycle training available to people thruogh schools and employers.

do you believe them? e.g. can you call their bluff by suggesting an sustrans traffic free / tow path type route? or some gentle MTBing... ...I suspect its an easy excuse not the true reason.

poly: as I just mentioned on the [url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/the-wiggins-effect-e-petition-for-bike-paths ]other safety thread[/url], I commute 11 miles to work by traffic-free Sustrans routes.

I simply wouldn't consider doing that commute on the road.

It would be faster by road. I could use a road bike, I'd get less muddy, I wouldn't swallow so many flies.

BUT.. it'd be a lot more stressful and I'd be taking my life in my hands every day. Especially as it would involve long stretches of dual carriageway.

I am an example of the cyclists you gain when you build good paths.

take a look at germany, most people cycle small distances there.

i was suprised at how many people did cycle

I cycle 40 miles a day across London. Every day I probably see and have to avoid all those things that the YouTube headcam heroes post and get agitated about all the time.
I don't think we need segregated cycle paths, I don't think we need draconian new rules for motorists - what we do need is
Education - for all. Children, adults, cyclists, motorists, lorry drivers, bus drivers, pedestrians!
Removal of free car parking at offices, shopping centres - anywhere
Changes in liability for collisions
Removal of police who routinely dismiss the possibility that their beloved motorist could possibly have done anything wrong
Huge increase in the costs of using cars, lets face it it's just too cheap
Removal and crushing of vehicles parked on double yellow lines or in dangerous positions
No pointless blaming of cyclists not wearing helmets whenever they get crushed by a 30 tonne vehicle.

One thing I've always thought of is a 'Priority time' during peak times where only 'working people' or 'parents with kids under 12 going to school' can use the roads. The amount of people on the road first thing in the morning that clearly are not going to work is ridiculous. e.g pensioners and shoppers. Just have a lay in and let everyone else get to work!!!

Obviously there will be cases of emergency e.g. drive a friend to hospital. But getting to the shops for 8:50 is not an emergency.

This will:
Help people get to work quicker by any vehicle.
reduce the number of vehicles on the road during peak times.

Reduced speed limits to 20mph in urban areas.

Four simple things required for all road users:

Responsibility: for all of your actions.
Empathy: See things from other peoples perspective.
Visibility: Make sure you be seen and you can see what you are doing/where you are going and that others can see this as well.
Safety (which comes from all of the above)

I think Wiggins comments about having give and take is probably far more important than the comments about helmets which everyone seemed to pick up on.

loum - Member
Reduced speed limits to 20mph in urban areas.

I'm not sure this will work, more awareness on both sides will. There's too much us and them at the end of the day we are all traffic.

mjsmke - how the hell would that be policed? Whilst a nice idea, it would be completely and utterly unworkable.

More people cycling is the best way to improve safety for cyclists.

Segregation - I can see the point on dual carriageways and fast A roads, but it cannot possibly happen in eg London. I believe the danger is that once bikes are segregated drivers will be even less tolerant when we, of necessity when there is no cycle lane, have to stray into "their" area.

I have personally experienced aggression from drivers who try to force me off the road and onto the cycle lane (which is a shared path with pedestrians, which I am not legally obliged to use on those occasions when I wish to ride quickly ie all the time). This is the danger - that we are "fair game" when not on a segregated path.

I favour a massive public awareness campaign highlighting the facts about car tax - ie, it doesn't exist, roads are paid for from income tax and council tax (does therefore a high-earning cyclist have more right to be on the road than a low-earning motorist?).

I also favour penalties for cyclists who ride off kerbs or out of side roads without looking, who weave and wobble across the carriageway with no indication, who meander up to the front of the traffic at traffic lights and then sit bang in the middle of the lanes fiddling with something in their bag...

Oh, and it would be really really nice if the Police stopped parking illegally outside the police station in Tottenham Lane, Crouch End. Yesterday morning I caught two in a van in the cycle lane. I told him he was committing a traffic offence and setting a bad example. He responded by attempting to shut his window while I was speaking, sneering and being sarcastic.

also favour penalties for cyclists who ride off kerbs or out of side roads without looking, who weave and wobble across the carriageway with no indication, who meander up to the front of the traffic at traffic lights and then sit bang in the middle of the lanes fiddling with something in their bag...

legalise the un registered use of handguns?

kcr - Member

More people cycling is the best way to improve safety for cyclists.

Safety in numbers ,like being in herd of wilderbeest so only the old ,sick and young get eaten by the lions

More people cycling is the best way to improve safety for cyclists.

And the best way to get more people cycling is to improve safety for cyclists.

Oh.

Segregation - I can see the point on dual carriageways and fast A roads, but it cannot possibly happen in eg London.

Why's that then? ([url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/the-wiggins-effect-e-petition-for-bike-paths ]another big thread running at the mo about segregated cycle paths by the way[/url])

mjsmke - how the hell would that be policed? Whilst a nice idea, it would be completely and utterly unworkable.

Give the DVLA access to the Inland Revenue database to see which car owners are working etc. I agree it would be difficult to manage but it's an idea.

but it cannot possibly happen in eg London.

Why not? Same old FUD - I don't think it's unrealistic to hope for better on a cycle forum. Please read - [url= http://lcc.org.uk/pages/go-dutch-faqs ]LCC Go Dutch FAQs[/url]

1/ Cyclist need to realize that they are not a threat to motorist so when they come to junction and the motorist pulls out and hits you it was not because he did not see you thats impossible unless he/she has eyes closed. The reason they pulled out is because they are looking for the threat behind you.
A/If they pull out and lorry hits them they probably dead.
B/if they do it to a car at least serious damage to there car and as cars aren't designed for side impact still a good chance of death.
C/Pull out on front of motorbike damage to car only therefore much more likely to pull out in front of a car.
D/Pull out front of cyclist.........what cyclist????????
As you approach a junction look the motorist in the eye it is nearly always obvious is he is going to pull out as he is looking straight through you. Stare at her untill you catch her eye (it nearly always happens) you have now been seen and unless you continue to stare at her they will not pull out.

Remember that off road cycle lanes are not for the benefit of cyclist they are there for benefit of motorists. They are dangerous for cyclist and pedestrains (if they share) and they will slow you down significantly. If you are on the road in town you may be getting 8/10 miles an hour. On a cycle path shared with a pedstrain you will be lucky to get 4 miles an hour, or even slower when you have to keep stopping constantly at the extra anti cycling junction. You are already taking forever (comapared to motorist) to get to your destination. So fight against cycle lanes.

On road cycling lanes have significantly increased cyclist injury and death rates (compared to same roads when they did not have lanes) entirely because councils have failed to make them wide enough. They were told to make them 1.5 metres wide but most are only 1 metre wide. Your wheel should be one metre from the curb that means you are cycling on the white line or cycling to close to the curb. The white line encouarges motorist to drive closer to cyclist ie this is my bit of the road thats yours. Complain to council and sue if you are in an accident.

Bright coloured clothing does not help you get seen. Only when you stand out will you be seen. As most cyclist ware bright coloured clothing and helmet both of which helped when they first started being used. I get seen because my helmet looks like a army style helmet. I notice on the occasional jurney into town pedestrains are always looking at it. Also I notice that motorist always give me more room when I am towing a trailer. Of course if everyone did the same they/we would not stand out. So naked cycling will garuntee you will be noticed even if every cyclist does it. NOTE the downside for men is that it would be assumed that cycling course your dick to shrink. Completly ignoring the wind chill factor. Of course the same effect will mean that everyone will believe that women will get pert breast by cycling.

Ignoring all this whining about high death rates in cities total rubbish. They quote figures for A roads in cities but the death rate on Rural A roads is 4 times higher. They are narrower and the motorists are going faster and they don’t want to part with a single mile per hour. I find Rural A roads unbelievable stressful compared to city A roads avoid if at all possible. The same drivers will give show far more respect on a back road than an A road.
Just back from Belgium car drivers showed more respect for cyclist in the city than they did for other car users. Even though the cycling left a lot to be desired. Why? The majority of car drivers are cyclists while it is the other way round in the UK.
I am bored it is sunny outside bollocks to this blog

All company owned vehicles cars vans lgvs to have the owners details on the side or back ,like buses and coaches are required to do by law.

Left turn buzzers on all vehicles over a certain size,

better educaton for cyclists and drivers of large vehicles about the left hand blind spot.

Top Gear to do an article about cyclists and larger vehicles.

Remember that off road cycle lanes are not for the benefit of cyclist they are there for benefit of motorists.

Absolute bobbins.

If you are on the road in town you may be getting 8/10 miles an hour on a cycle path shared with a pedstrain 4 miles an hour, or even slower when you have to keep stopping constantly at the extra anti cycling junction.

[i]*checks Endomondo* [/i]

Average speed 24.3kph (~15mph) - and I'm on a MTB-turned-commuter and neither fit nor fast.

So fight against cycle lanes.

Please please don't.

Fight against stupid infrastructure. Fight against pointless paint that adds nothing and dangerous junctions. Don't fight against segregated safe cycle paths. They are our best hope.

(Please refer to the other thread for more of this riveting argument)

Break the cultural programming of petrol-powered mobilty aid users that their device is anything more than a convenient (for them) means of personal transport......

TBH, I'm not convinced about segregated cycle lanes. They make for a much more pleasant cycling experience IME but the problems start when you find yourself forced to share the road with other vehicles again.

The less drivers are forced to interact with cyclists the less they know what to do and ,weirdly enough, the less patient they are.

This is from my experience living in Norway.

a fresh start from everyone.

Worth repeating. Succinct and so true.

Aside from that - anything that makes us more like Holland and Denmark, from attitudes on both sides to infrastructure. Maybe less sense of entitlement in the face of conflicting interests and more ability to adapt our behaviour. Re-testing for drivers every 5-8 years and some kind of training+testing+possibly insurance for cyclists would get my support. The UK is a stressed* and densely populated** place and something has to change.

* opionion
** fact
for the sake of minimising argument creation here )

Graham S, because in the back streets of London (and probably other cities too) there is no room for properly segregated paths. We need tolerance, tolerance, tolerance. The realisation that we share a small, crowded island; some patience; some empathy.

Down the side of the A10? Yes, possible and necessary. Along the back streets of Bloomsbury? No.

What BruceWee says.

'm not convinced about segregated cycle lanes. They make for a much more pleasant cycling experience... The less drivers are forced to interact with cyclists the less they know what to do and ,weirdly enough, the less patient they are.

Those pleasant segregated cycle lanes bring in new cyclists.
New cyclists mean more people with an understanding of cycling, more people with family members cycling, more empathy, more tolerance. New cyclists mean better faculties for all cyclists.

One thing I've always thought of is a 'Priority time' during peak times where only 'working people' or 'parents with kids under 12 going to school' can use the roads.

take a look at germany, most people cycle small distances there.
i was suprised at how many people did cycle

I'd probably use Germany as a better example than Holland or Denmark.
The Dutch have had excellent facilities for so long now, that the planners in Dutch local authorities and government grew up on cycling, cycled to school, and quite probably cycled to their office or at least to the station that morning. No showers needed, just commute on a bike, park it up and carry on with the day's business.

Germany is very much like UK in that teh retrofit of cycling facilities is much more recent. But there's a lot of it.

The UK is a stressed* and densely populated** place and something has to change.

* opionion
** fact

The Netherlands is right behind England in the population density league table. [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_density ]Fact[/url].

Those pleasant segregated cycle lanes bring in new cyclists.
New cyclists mean more people with an understanding of cycling, more people with family members cycling, more empathy, more tolerance.

Agreed. You don't have to use them but they'd be a good thing for all of us imo.

Down the side of the A10? Yes, possible and necessary. Along the back streets of Bloomsbury? No.

Why not? Does every one of those back streets need cars on it, travelling on both directions?

Grahams, didn't know that - so all the more reason for us to look at their infrastructure and cycling culture?

Those pleasant segregated cycle lanes bring in new cyclists.
New cyclists mean more people with an understanding of cycling, more people with family members cycling, more empathy, more tolerance. New cyclists mean better faculties for all cyclists.

There are loads of families cycling and there is a lot of tolerance so long as you don't get in drivers way.

I actually find Norway worse than the UK when cycling on shared roads in terms of tolerance. When you consider how far Scandinavians will go to avoid confrontation the aggression shown on the road is scary. They will do absolutely anything to get passed you.

Remember that off road cycle lanes are not for the benefit of cyclist they are there for benefit of motorists.

Absolute bobbins.

If you are on the road in town you may be getting 8/10 miles an hour on a cycle path shared with a pedstrain 4 miles an hour, or even slower when you have to keep stopping constantly at the extra anti cycling junction.

*checks Endomondo*

Average speed 24.3kmh (~15mph) - and I'm on a MTB-turned-commuter and neither fit nor fast

So fight against cycle lanes.

Please please don't.

Fight against stupid infrastructure. Fight against pointless paint that adds nothing and dangerous junctions. Don't fight against segregated safe cycle paths. They are our best hope.

Top Gear to do an article about cyclists and larger vehicles

maybe Fifth gear might be a safer bet (although only about 3 people watch that)

because in the back streets of London (and probably other cities too) there is no room for properly segregated paths. We need tolerance, tolerance, tolerance.

Sure - you need to make the back roads safe to. The Dutch get that as well - 20mph limit and removal of rat runs - all but main roads become no through road so the traffic on them is not trying to avoid a main route and 'in a hurry'.

GrahamS - Member

do you believe them? e.g. can you call their bluff by suggesting an sustrans traffic free / tow path type route? or some gentle MTBing... ...I suspect its an easy excuse not the true reason.

poly: as I just mentioned on the other safety thread, I commute 11 miles to work by traffic-free Sustrans routes.

I simply wouldn't consider doing that commute on the road.

It would be faster by road. I could use a road bike, I'd get less muddy, I wouldn't swallow so many flies.

BUT.. it'd be a lot more stressful and I'd be taking my life in my hands every day. Especially as it would involve long stretches of dual carriageway.

I am an example of the cyclists you gain when you build good paths.

15 miles an hour my arse most people aren't doing that ourside town.

Here's my last commute. 18.04km in 44m:37secs
http://www.endomondo.com/workouts/kzSnvzWEO2w

Almost entirely off-road on Sustrans traffic-free routes (NCN72 mainly).

What is a traffic-free Sustrans routes??? Are you sharing with pedestrains?

Yep.

http://www.sustrans.org.uk/

Do you stop at junctions?

Of course.

Are there any traffic lights in your city?

Plenty. I use them to cross the road.

Are there any motorists?

Loads, but I'm not on the road - I'm on a proper segregated cycle path.

You are showing just how thoughtless you are espcially if you are doing 15 miles an hour. What would that do to child if you hit him. Get off the pavement you don't belong there.

You assume too much. I have a young child of my own, I am perfectly careful around pedestrians especially children, thanks. I even get a cheery hello from the ones I see every day.

Get on the road where you belong you have no right to be on the pavement stressing pedestrains and putting them at risk.

No thanks. I'm not riding to work along a dual carriageway.

I have every right to be using designated shared use paths. And I will.
I don't "stress" anyone - I'm polite and courteous. I even spent time picking the politest sounding bell I could find.

I haven't read any of the thread part from the title, so first off, apologies there.

Now for my thoughts on bike safety.

The one thing that would make cycling safer, is by keeping other traffic and bikes apart. I see a bike as a pedestrian with a bit of metal. And we know to keep pedestrians and other traffic separate, because any time there's a vehicle/pedestrian incident, the pedestrian will come off far worse. I don't see having a bit of metal changing that, and I'm sure accident data will back me up. On country roads we tell pedestrians (quiet rightly) to face oncoming traffic so they may take evasive action if needed. Why shouldn't the same apply to cyclists.

TuckerUK: trouble is, the pedestrian fatality rate is roughly the same as cycling, so treating cyclists like pedestrians may not be the answer.
We need to treat both cyclists and pedestrians better by making streets safer and providing safe places to walk and cycle.

I think the German way of raised cycle lanes running along side the paths and cyclist having priority over motorists so the car has to stop turning to allow the cyclist to cross over the junction. Cycle paths have their own zebra crossing type lights too which allow them quick access to cross over a road. They probably have a faster average speed due to few delays but a slower maximum speed as they low speed due the risk of accidents with pedestrians. All this will cost a lot of money to implement nationwide and won't be popular with the public as cyclists are seen as minority.

i am shocked. I agree with something published by the [url= http://www.****/debate/article-2182586/Bradley-Wiggins-knows-lot-cycling-But-wrong-safety-benefits-wearing-helmet.html ]Daily Mail[/url]

Now i'm in some kind of liberal tail spin.