Cycle Safety End of Year Review 2011

TfL have released their Cycle Safety End of Year Review.
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/projectsandschemes/15480.aspx

Positive objectives.
Great to see the 2nd objective, tackling the perception that cycling is risky. This is a good reason to promote training and maintain TfLs line of having a mix of helmeted and non helmeted cyclists in their promotional images.

1. To ensure the future growth in cycling in London is accompanied by a
   reduced rate of cycling casualties;
   
2. To increase the perception that cycling is a safe and attractive transport
   option;
   
3. To make progress towards achieving the existing and future targets for
   reducing cyclists killed or seriously injured;
   
4. To ensure London continues to be a world leader in developing
   effective cycling safety improvements underpinned by analysis and a
   sound understanding of the cause of collisions.
   
   

Interesting reading

Close proximity collision
between cyclist and vehicle

?

Yes and one argument against the usefulness of hi visibility gear is that though driver may see you earlier and in the distance it the 'close proximity collisions' that hurt:)

Great stuff, but very zone 1 , 2 and a bit of zone 3. I d like to see what's being done to make cycling safer in outer London boroughs such as Redbridge..

Yes and one argument against the usefulness of hi visibility gear is that though driver may see you earlier and in the distance it the 'close proximity collisions' that hurt:)

Sorry if I'm being dim but what do you mean?

Im thinking of the value of hi-viz vests as a safety measure. Cyclists can get themselves seen by riding in a drivers line of sight. Wearing a flouro may get you seen from a distance yet riding in a position out of drivers view won't help whatever the rider is wearing.

Great stuff, but very zone 1 , 2 and a bit of zone 3. I d like to see what's being done to make cycling safer in outer London boroughs such as Redbridge..

Redbridge have a strict helmet policy for all schools teaching this year. Got to love Redbridge.

@Skydancer
Ah, that's what "close proximity collision" means. I couldn't get past the fact that a non-close proximity collision wouldn't be a collision at all.

@Wiganwill
Surely the requirement to wear a helmet during training is no more a barrier to participation than the requirement to wear hi-vis or signal at junctions. Once training is over, everything comes down to personal choice.

Personally I use a helmet and I'm happy that the training company I work for also insists on them for training under 18's. I'm happy to talk to students about the pros and cons and let them make up their own minds what to do once I'm not responsible for their safety. I do let people know that my view is probably coloured by the amount of other sports I do where helmet use is the norm. I'm also happy to let them know that I don't use one on my "around town" bike used for short utility trips in traffic but do use one for all forms of recreational cycling. Choice isn't choice unless it's informed after all.

TfL have released their Cycle Safety End of Year Review.
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/projectsandschemes/15480.aspx

Anyone noticed that this paper looks very much like a toilet roll when viewed in Acrobat 66% ?

(and a lot of crap in it too)

The 4 objectives are great, but the paper keeps constantly contradicting and not-getting them.

The artistic impression of supa-dupa-hi-way; I need a surgeon to get my palm off my face. Great that the planners admit that their mirrors are just "trix".