Cycle campaigning

I love your english comedians. I particularly like the guy with the fluffy yellow hair who pretends he is the mayor of london.

^ a quote stolen from 'outnumbered', that seemed to fit.

On the actual subject of cycle campaigning, I was encouraged to see that the letters page of 'New Civil Engineer' (the shockingly readable and informative weekly publication of the Institute of Civil Engineers) has been dominated by cycling for the last few issues, and it's even spilled out onto the cover story and editorials in the latest issue. The debate seems a good representation of the current spectrum of thinking. All the talking points are out there percolating, and sooner or later they'll be adsorbed by the people who actually design this stuff.

I just want to short out his hair.

Someone's already done that.

Boris is not God.

What?!
Well, he's not Boris Godunov.

"Mayor, only you have the power to keep Londoners on our streets safe"

Is this a joke!? I know Boris is pretty good but the idea that he can stand on every junction corner at every minute of the day telling cyclists to stop going up the inside of left turning lorries and for lorries to look out for them is pretty mad

Johnson pretty good? At what exactly?
Bullshit I suppose..

All the talking points are out there percolating, and sooner or later they'll be adsorbed by the people who actually design this stuff.
I design the stuff and we know about the constant cry for the magical solution of segregation. Apart from the practical difficulties, there is no evidence that segregation is any safer than blue paint

Johnson pretty good? At what exactly?
Bullshit I suppose..
Hahaha. JaRepped.

I design the stuff and we know about the constant cry for the magical solution of segregation. Apart from the practical difficulties, there is no evidence that segregation is any safer than blue paint

Not the segregation we get over here, but the segregation they get over there (points to most of europe)
You need to design to the standards of europe, not the bollocks we get in the UK

I design the stuff and we know about the constant cry for the magical solution of segregation.
Yeah, you're not exactly giving the impression that you're much or a listener.
Apart from the practical difficulties, there is no evidence that segregation is any safer than blue paint
I'm not personally a fan of segregation, but really?

To an extent he's correct, for example, even in Copenhagen, left (or right) hook are still a risk, the biggest difference is education.

Ban lorries from the roads between 6am and 10pm.Ban black cabs and motorbikes from the bus lanes,least we would get some of the road back.Boris the cunt has given all the road to these bastards and all hes given cyclists is £22 million worth of blue fucking paint.
we need to get every cyclist in LONDON to ride down the centre of bus lanes on their commute and bring the LONDON to a standstill for a week and if that dont work a month,they will listen then

If the Mayor of London, who has executive control of TfL, does not have the power to sort out the traffic infrastructure of this city, who on earth does?

As for questioning the appropriateness of the infrastructure before an inquest, just have a quick butchers at the comments section of just about any on line newspaper in any report of a cycling death. It seems that it is perfectly acceptable to blame the cyclist before an inquest.

If the Mayor of London, who has executive control of TfL, does not have the power to sort out the traffic infrastructure of this city, who on earth does?

.

We keep blaming infrastructure which distracts from looking at what people do. If a driver turns left and isn't 100% sure that it is clear on their left, either because they haven't checked or because their vehicle design makes that check impossible they shouldn't turn or be riding such a vehicle. End-of. Whatever the infrastructure

We keep blaming infrastructure which distracts from looking at what people do. If a driver turns left and isn't 100% sure that it is clear on their left, either because they haven't checked or because their vehicle design makes that check impossible they shouldn't turn or be riding such a vehicle.

Here's the thing, the infrastructure allow the drivers to turn left at a higher speed than they should.

muilt groove earlier mentioned the act of lemmings like people do on the cycle lane, the infrastructure give people the illusion it's 100% okay to undertake all the time, the same logic can be applied for people driving motorised vehicles too.

Just because it allows them to speed when turning it doesn't mean the have to do this and to do it without looking properly.

Just because the cycle lane encourage cyclists to undertake doesn't mean they have to do this without realising the danger.

^Victim blaming Ed?
tbf It's not necessarily the cyclists undertaking but the drivers passing then turning

Quite the opposite, there are road layout that make it easier and comfortable to take a corner at 30mph with minimal risk, despite the cycle lane in the way.

We keep blaming infrastructure which distracts from looking at what people do. If a driver turns left and isn't 100% sure that it is clear on their left, either because they haven't checked or because their vehicle design makes that check impossible they shouldn't turn or be riding such a vehicle. End-of. Whatever the infrastructure

true - but everyone, even the best trained, makes mistakes. key is designing roads so that a small error doesn't kill. separation (done well, not the british way) can help with that...

Agree that where people are out and about they shouldn't die/get injured due to an error and of course the environment contributes to this, as well as driver behavoir.

A knee jerk reaction to separate, to move people out of drivers space rather than make more spaces people friendly and give drivers the heavy responsibility to look out for others. Where people are around out of cars drivers should never go fast enough to harm and should be punished if they take risks with people.

We come round back again to how to change motorists behaviour, and so it comes back to the Strict Liability issue. Start the ball rolling on this, have the discussion whilst the topic is high on people's agenda's. Enshrining Strict Liability into law would ensure a cultural shift in drivers responsibility, like seatbelt laws, it would take a while to gain traction, but it needs to be done.

The debate needs to dismiss the war on motorists viewpoint which would be stridently cried out by the motorists lobby, and discuss how cyclists and pedestrians have little to no recompense through the law, when they are hit by a larger vehicle. It would also hopefully curb some cyclists behaviour, making them more liable for any injury they may cause, because of their riding style..

Strict liability exist in Denmark but right hook are still commonplace there.

Ed, so.

They have it, so if they so desire the cyclists have an easier route (hopefully) to recompense and some sort of more effective law enforcement than happens currently.

How else are you going to change how drivers interact with cyclists/pedestrians, if there is no punishment for transgression. Strict Liability (as far as my knowledge/understanding of it goes) would make it easier to prosecute and claim compensation from motorists if they injure me or damage my property (my bike), what's not to like about that.

Because drivers can be shit on the continent as well, means we shouldn't try it over here..

Too much negativity Ed,

don't turn into this man

Isn't cycling in Denmark ten times safer than the UK? Sure I read that somewhere.

Not the segregation we get over here, but the segregation they get over there (points to most of europe)
You need to design to the standards of europe, not the bollocks we get in the UK
In suburban areas, brilliant. But in urban environments in Holland and Copenhagen they still have the right hook conflict everywhere. Unless you're talking about over and underpasses at every junction, you cannot physically segregate at junctions. Only on the approaches to them. The difference is cyclists have legal priority to pass on the inside and vehicles must give way, combined with strict liability and a culture to boot. Also cyclists are banned from using the road when they have an adjacent facility. Are you aware of that? Would you be happy for that here too? Cyclists have the ear of the press and now is the time to sieze the moment and lobby the DfT for these changes, not Boris. Even if you still want the infrastucture, bare in mind it's been built up over decades over there. But segregation without the law change IMO in many urban situations is more dangerous.