How Not to Get Hit By Cars

[EdBike]

I was doing some research into the safety issues surrounding cycling, so I googled a few terms and came across this website; Bicycle Safety: How to Not Get Hit by Cars. The title ‘How not to get hit by cars’ made me laugh. I love the honesty...

With BEBA potentially going for a slice of a huge £560 million government grant to help the industry (Read here: http://www.pedelecs.co.uk/forum/electric-bicycles/7234-bebas-question-norman-baker.html) I thought it would be interesting to ask some Pedelecs Forum members what they’d suggest to do with a grant, especially around bike safety, which seems to be a sticking point for many potential cyclists and e-cyclists. What do you think?

• Invest in cycle paths?
• Invest in cycling training?
• Subsidize electric bikes?
• Subsidize electric bikes events?

 

[tillson]

I was doing some research into the safety issues surrounding cycling, so I googled a few terms and came across this website; Bicycle Safety: How to Not Get Hit by Cars. The title ‘How not to get hit by cars’ made me laugh. I love the honesty...

With BEBA potentially going for a slice of a huge £560 million government grant to help the industry (Read here: http://www.pedelecs.co.uk/forum/electric-bicycles/7234-bebas-question-norman-baker.html) I thought it would be interesting to ask some Pedelecs Forum members what they’d suggest to do with a grant, especially around bike safety, which seems to be a sticking point for many potential cyclists and e-cyclists. What do you think?

• Invest in cycle paths?
• Invest in cycling training?
• Subsidize electric bikes?
• Subsidize electric bikes events?

I can't see how 3 or 4 can possibly contribute anything to safety.

1 might work. I'm not a great believer in safety training. If someone is of an idiotic disposition, it's very difficult, if not impossible to train it out of them.

The greatest contribution to safety would be to physically separate cars and cycles with a structure.

 

[flecc]

• Invest in cycle paths?
• Invest in cycling training?
• Subsidize electric bikes?
• Subsidize electric bikes events?

This is a no-brainer, ignore safety:

Cycle paths? No, they annoy many, and many cyclists disapprove also.

Cycle training? No, ineffective, no proof it works.

E-bike events? No, only the converts go to them.

Subsidise e-bike purchase? Yes, Yes, Yes! £560 millions is £18,000 per e-bike sold in the UK, so we'd only need a little bit of it anyway. Best scheme would give a substantial e-bike purchase subsidy, then a 50% subsidy on subsequent battery replacements for the bike's life, thus ensuring continuing use of the bikes bought and removal of the worst barrier to adoption.
.

 

[schoe]

Separate lanes for bikes like in Holland would be the safest for cyclists but I doubt it would be possible now due to our road system, otherwise you are always going to get accidents like this from rogue motorists.

Eight club cyclists killed in head-on crash in Italy | World news | The Guardian

 

[EdBike]

This is a no-brainer, ignore safety:

Cycle paths? No, they annoy many, and many cyclists disapprove also.

Cycle training? No, ineffective, no proof it works.

E-bike events? No, only the converts go to them.

Subsidise e-bike purchase? Yes, Yes, Yes! £560 millions is £18,000 per e-bike sold in the UK, so we'd only need a little bit of it anyway. Best scheme would give a substantial e-bike purchase subsidy, then a 50% subsidy on subsequent battery replacements for the bike's life, thus ensuring continuing use of the bikes bought and removal of the worst barrier to adoption.
.

That would assume the industry doesn't grow much, (and it would if there were £18k subsidies ). The point about subsidizing batteries is interesting however.

Is price really an issue? Sure, a £500 battery replacement is a sting in the tale, but compare that with an oyster card or buying petrol every two weeks

Investment in infrastructure would last longer and benefit more people (including other cyclists - some are bound to jump on the bandwagon?). Would separate and combined cycle paths be an option worth exploring. That way everyone's happy?

 

[lectureral]

I hadn't seen that reported, Schoe - how sad - all local to one area and, no doubt, friends - so many devastated families.

 

[jbond]

Subsidise e-bike purchase? Yes, Yes, Yes! £560 millions is £18,000 per e-bike sold in the UK, so we'd only need a little bit of it anyway. Best scheme would give a substantial e-bike purchase subsidy, then a 50% subsidy on subsequent battery replacements for the bike's life, thus ensuring continuing use of the bikes bought and removal of the worst barrier to adoption..

There's a very, very simple solution. Make e-Bikes and e-bike components (such as batteries) zero VAT rated. It removes all the bureaucracy of the cycle to work scheme. It wouldn't be a huge cost to the government, the retailer or the consumer. It's simply lost government revenue.

 

[indalo]

This is quite an interesting thread and I like some of the responses. I was going to suggest we might substitute driver training for cycle training but Tillson has already covered that with his "idiotic disposition" remark and obviously motorists with such an affliction far outnumber such cyclists.

Flecc's comment about cycle paths surprises me as I've always thought separation from other traffic was desirable. I do understand that, in a perfect world, we'd all share road space sensibly and respect for others, particularly cyclists and pedestrians, would be the norm.

Perhaps other cyclists dislike the idea of segregation as it could, I suppose, be construed as discrimination. If that's the case, I can buy into that viewpoint but really, more driver training wouldn't go amiss in this country.

Indalo

 

[z0mb13e]

Retests?

While I am the first to decry any excessive or onerous legislative or regulatory requirements that we, the public must endure, in this instance I still don't understand why we don't have retests every 4 or 5 years.

The level of competency of some drivers is truly staggering. Surely this needs to be reassessed on a regular basis?

 

[allen-uk]

It will take more riders and more years to gather proper statistics, but there is anecdotal evidence that electric bikes are more safe than ordinary ones, not least from our own experiences. So maybe more of them would make a contribution to safety.

A

 

[Patrick]

Flecc's comment about cycle paths surprises me as I've always thought separation from other traffic was desirable. I do understand that, in a perfect world, we'd all share road space sensibly and respect for others, particularly cyclists and pedestrians, would be the norm.

True separation, as you get on motorways where pedestrians are banned and pedestrianized roads where motor vehicles aren't allowed, would be nice, but for the most part it's impractical. In practice not even pedestrians and vehicles are segregated, most journeys by foot involve crossing a road and so mixing pedestrians and traffic.

If we had a network of well maintained cycle paths following direct routes from which motor vehicles were excluded then it would be fantastic. What we tend to get, however, is poorly maintained paths following routes that the motorists don't want, or half hearted lanes along the side of the road that stop at junctions throwing us back into the main flow of traffic just when we most need to be separated.

 

[flecc]

Flecc's comment about cycle paths surprises me as I've always thought separation from other traffic was desirable. I do understand that, in a perfect world, we'd all share road space sensibly and respect for others, particularly cyclists and pedestrians, would be the norm.

Perhaps other cyclists dislike the idea of segregation as it could, I suppose, be construed as discrimination. If that's the case, I can buy into that viewpoint but really, more driver training wouldn't go amiss in this country.

Indalo

I agree completely on the safety advantages of separate tracks Indalo, but many cyclist strongly object on grounds of discrimination. This potentially deprives them of road space since separate tracks leave the way open to enforced use, banning cyclists from roads where cycle paths are available. This is something dear to the hearts of motorists who are an overwhelming majority.

This view is related to the lack of space in Britain and the poor maintenance of existing cycle facilities. Enforced use of those that exist would be a horrifying possibility so I support the anti-brigade for those reasons.
.

 

[CeeGee]

While I am the first to decry any excessive or onerous legislative or regulatory requirements that we, the public must endure, in this instance I still don't understand why we don't have retests every 4 or 5 years.

The level of competency of some drivers is truly staggering. Surely this needs to be reassessed on a regular basis?

You are asking turkeys to vote "yes" to Christmas.
How many members of the House of Lords, along with MPs, would lose their licences if they were retested?

Colin

 

[Mussels]

True separation, as you get on motorways where pedestrians are banned and pedestrianized roads where motor vehicles aren't allowed, would be nice, but for the most part it's impractical. In practice not even pedestrians and vehicles are segregated, most journeys by foot involve crossing a road and so mixing pedestrians and traffic.

If we had a network of well maintained cycle paths following direct routes from which motor vehicles were excluded then it would be fantastic. What we tend to get, however, is poorly maintained paths following routes that the motorists don't want, or half hearted lanes along the side of the road that stop at junctions throwing us back into the main flow of traffic just when we most need to be separated.

I ride on well maintained and seperated cycle paths. They are OK when empty but as soon as you get a few cyclists on there then everyone gets bunched up with congestion, I'd rather ride on the roads as drivers in London are generally considerate of cyclists.

 

[z0mb13e]

You are asking turkeys to vote "yes" to Christmas.
How many members of the House of Lords, along with MPs, would lose their licences if they were retested?

Colin

Isn't it strange that the mental image of the house of commons, with its braying suits morphs so easily into a flock of gobbling turkeys. When imagining The house of Lords on the other hand, I can only see cigar smoking old turkeys reading broad sheets in comfy leather chairs in dark wood panelled rooms.

I'm sure that there are lots of people who would lose their license and that makes me feel partially reassured, in the same way that I know aircraft pilots license expires unless they retrain. It shows that they have continued or increasing competency. But I can't see it ever happening unless the EU are involved, and as you say there is likely far to much of a vested interest in the status quo.

 

[CeeGee]

You have to consider the logistics of providing all the extra examiners that would be required to re-test every driver on a regular basis, and who would pay for it all. Already there are many drivers on the road with no licence, more with no insurance, and as soon as the police have a blitz the public are up in arms about wasted resources.
I also believe that any Government that did bring in your eminently sensible suggestion would find it one of the biggest vote killers in history. It appears the majority of the population believe they have a God given right to a driving licence, and competence and ability don't come into the equation.

Colin

 

[flecc]

It appears the majority of the population believe they have a God given right to a driving licence, and competence and ability don't come into the equation.

Colin

Structurally we've created a world where driving is essential for most, in the same way that the USA did it years ago.

Many years ago heavy items like milk were delivered to our doors, very many grocery items had minimal or no packaging so were far less bulky, and the shop we got them from was often on the nearest corner.

Not far away and well within walking distance was a local shopping centre where greengrocers, butchers and fishmongers were available, together with a local post office and an ironmonger who seemed to have everything we needed stashed away somewhere.

In the world we have now with heavy and bulky family food supplies from large supermarkets at a distance and out-of-town retail parks for everything else, any excess limiting of car use would create very real problems for the majority.
.

 

[z0mb13e]

You have to consider the logistics of providing all the extra examiners that would be required to re-test every driver on a regular basis, and who would pay for it all. Already there are many drivers on the road with no licence, more with no insurance, and as soon as the police have a blitz the public are up in arms about wasted resources.
I also believe that any Government that did bring in your eminently sensible suggestion would find it one of the biggest vote killers in history. It appears the majority of the population believe they have a God given right to a driving licence, and competence and ability don't come into the equation.

Colin

A vote killer for sure. Better then to not mention it on any manifesto or better still oppose it entirely until in power and then just enact it. Isn't that how it is done?

And yes, it would cause problems, and we would pay for it. How much, would likely be too much as prices are clearly set for those with deep pockets. On the other hand it would provide a boost to the driving instructors industry.

More uninsured drivers without licenses for sure. I know of GPs who are faced with the choice of issuing medical certificates for people of advancing years so they can drive regardless of their fitness to do so as the GPs know that they will drive anyway and as a result, drive without insurance.

Perhaps a system of licence plates that incorporate road tax and insurance (yeah that will probably never happen here either!). That would just then leave the need to identify drivers driving without a licence. While I can think of ways of doing so I can't bring myself to suggest them as it is too much of an intrusion by the state, though much of it is probably only just around the corner. I think traffic police will suffice for now It would likely take a generation for retests to become the norm.

 

[z0mb13e]

Structurally we've created a world where driving is essential for most, in the same way that the USA did it years ago.

Many years ago heavy items like milk were delivered to our doors, very many grocery items had minimal or no packaging so were far less bulky, and the shop we got them from was often on the nearest corner.

Not far away and well within walking distance was a local shopping centre where greengrocers, butchers and fishmongers were available, together with a local post office and an ironmonger who seemed to have everything we needed stashed away somewhere.

In the world we have now with heavy and bulky family food supplies from large supermarkets at a distance and out-of-town retail parks for everything else, any excess limiting of car use would create very real problems for the majority.
.

I still get my milk delivered by the Milkman in his Milk float (or efloat)!

We are very much car dependant though I suspect that will change over the next few decades. More and more people are dipping into 'fuel poverty' each year (having to spend more than 10% of your income on fuel) so personal transport will be reduced to shorter and shorter journeys until either an alternative is found or it simply isn't sustainable for the majority and then its back to walking, public transport or bikes! (Ebikes charged from solar cells or mini wind turbines maybe).

 

[flecc]

I still get my milk delivered by the Milkman in his Milk float (or efloat)!

We are very much car dependant though I suspect that will change over the next few decades. More and more people are dipping into 'fuel poverty' each year (having to spend more than 10% of your income on fuel) so personal transport will be reduced to shorter and shorter journeys until either an alternative is found or it simply isn't sustainable for the majority and then its back to walking, public transport or bikes! (Ebikes charged from solar cells or mini wind turbines maybe).

The point I was making was that walking, bikes, e-bikes or public transport aren't practical for a once-weekly average family shop at a considerable distance on cycle unfriendly roads, so they are never likely to be the answer now. The answer may well be in home deliveries like the present supermarket and Acardo ones, but we'll have to pay of course.
.