-
I still think training would be needed for some. As much as the risks would be reduced some would still want training and find it reassuring to know they are learning from someone suitably qualified. I doubt in a motor free world that the funding would take the same shape, it would either be a very niche market to teach people or such an essential skill it's added to the curriculum, for some reason I just can't see a middle ground if we went motor free.
I think our road designs would take a very different shape too, would we need/want traffic lights, speed bumps or even markings. Would we really want pavement and road/cycle track or just a large shared space. I can see level crossings at railway lines still having lights(if trains have been allowed in this idea as a last bastion of public transport).
Also I'd think our "motorways" will then be filled with sail trikes zooming along whenever the wind is in the direction they want to go.
You are reading a single comment by @Clockwise and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Clockwise
Interested in views on this.
I think that training (whether delivered by skilled parents or cycle trainers) would enhance peoples bike control skills and and improve interactions with others in the environment be they walkers and other cyclists. With some input riders would encounter less risk. While in general risk of harm would be lower in a motor free world, the severity of any crash being significantly less. People with poor bike control/ poor understanding of basics of interaction with others may still be likely to crash.