SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists

Bean Long wrote:
Theo Bekkers wrote:

No thanks, it has already been done for me. Hence the figures I
quoted. Your figures are your perception, nothing to do with reality.
I would be amazed if Canberra cyclists only accounted for 0.5% of the
traffic.

Theo

Pedal Power do a "Cordon Count" every year. I'll see if I can dig up any
figures.

Some data he

http://tinyurl.com/2j8u2p

Interestingly, if one assumes that Canberra's population is 300,000
(which is close to the mark) and that EVERYONE in Canberra drives their
car to work during the time of the Cordon Count, the number of cyclists
passing through the cordon (which represents Civic and Acton only and
therefore excluding the majority of Canberra) would be 0.6% of all traffic.

--
Bean

Remove "yourfinger" before replying

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 13:00:41 +1000, Resound wrote:

How many people live 10km or 15km from work I wonder? Where I work a
lot of people live 20 or so, and with no decent cycle network now the
M2's history. Someone from St Ives wants to cycle but there's too
much ugliness on the Mona vale Road for him.

I'm assuming that's to North Ryde/Macquarie Park?

Go Telegraph Rd (or Pentecost, or even Burns Rd) to get to Turramurra. Go
down Kissing Pt Rd and through the cycleway at the bottom. Follow the
signs to the Uni, then through. Voila, you're at the Mac. Centre, and
getting to anywhere nearby is pretty easy.

Anyone know of a reasonably easy to access shower in Parramatta?

--
Dave Hughes |
"Assassination is the extreme form of
censorship." -- George Bernard Shaw

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 06:50:14 +0000, Dave wrote:

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 13:00:41 +1000, Resound wrote:

Excuse me. That should have said Zebee.

--
Dave Hughes |
There's no point in being grown up if you can't be
childish sometimes.-- Dr. Who

Patrick Turner wrote:

Theo Bekkers wrote:
Patrick Turner wrote:

But once you ride only on dedicated off road cycle paths, then the
risk plummets,
How so? The majority of cycle accidents don't involve another vehicle.
Roadways are filled with very predictable motor vehicle traffic, not those
wildly unpredictable pedestrians and dogs.




If Oppie was a young fella of 25 now, would he be seen on the roads?
Of course he would, what a silly question.

Maybe he would have played tennis.

Oppi could have been lots of things.

So could you be, were you to live again.

But while watching a mountain stage on TV,
when Cadel was struggling upwards,
I distincly saw a figure briefly,
and riding close alongside,
and wispering some encouragment,
'twas the ghost of Oppie,
and then he was gone...

That wasn't the ghost of Oppie, that was one of those crazy drunk
spectators yelling at him.

Dorfus

Shane Stanley wrote:

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

Thanks for the link, but there's far more there than I have time to
read.

With respect, you're posting an awful lot here and presumably expecting
others to read it; perhaps a bit less typing time and a bit more reading
time would be a sound investment.

Have ye not much for me to read that ye wrote?

I spend half my life reading and studying and figuring.

Cycling is only a recrational thing for me, and no amount of reading up
on researched factoids based on overseas experiences of others will
change what cycling and life is for me here right now.

And I think that compared to many other people
whose pots I read and whose newspaper letters and articles I read,
that mine are rather brief.

I will however read that thing I said I had no time for rightaway,
and look for things applicable to my situation.

But no matter how much I knew, I ain't gonna fix Sydney's cycling
problems.

What did you make out of reading what i said I didn't have time for?

How much do you read?

What flows from your reading?

Patrick Turner.



--
Shane Stanley

EuanB wrote:

Patrick Turner Wrote:
Just stating about what I observe.

The probability of error is huge, and the truth could be either way,
IMHO.

The probability is not huge, it's four times that of a motorist and
that probability is so small most people don't even think about it.
Four times a very small thing is still a small thing.

I got a vote here for 4.

Anyone else like to nominate a number which could be voted on.

I'd say Maybe 20.




But last month I did have to wait 1/2 an hour for a taxi outside the
ABC
headquaters on NthBourne,
and only a very small number of cyclists rode past, maybe 3 or 4, while
hundreds of motorists
went past.

Ever considered that cyclists may use different roads?

Sure.

But on those other roads, there are also motorists, and the % of
cyclists
amoung them may either be smaller, or greater than NthB Ave.

The simple test is, pick any road you like, and find the ratio of bikes
to cars etc.

Someone said Perth has 7% of its traffic on a bike.

I'd say here in the ACT maybe its 1%.

This is the average % all year, 24/7.

Cotter road, october sunday morning between 7am and 11am, maybe its 50%.

Maybe that's the busiest road for bikes I can think of, but elsewhere
the bike % is so low its almost invisible.

Patrick Turner.

--
EuanB

EuanB wrote:

Patrick Turner Wrote:
EuanB wrote:

Shane Stanley Wrote:
In article ,
EuanB wrote:

Per 100,000 hrs exposure and per 100,000 kms travelled you're
aproximately four times more likely to die on the road as a
cyclist.

Surely the ratio per hour and the ratio per km would be different,
no?
No. Contray to popular belief the average speed for utility trips
taken by bicycle is about the same as a utility trip taken by a car,
or
indeed quicker. It takes me 70 minutes to ride the thirty kilometers
in
to work, the best I've done in a car is fifty.

Gees, your place of commuting is indeed bad.
The longest trip to get to work here could be about 45 minutes by car,
and it'd take at least twice than by bike.

But you forget one factor.

Add in the time taken to earn the money to pay for the motoring.
THEN the average time taken to do a distance becomes much greater,
and the bicycle wins easily.

No, I haven't forgotten that factor.

But you didn't factor it into above calcs for journey time,
or to calculate average speed.

That predicates that you don't
own a car, which costs on average 250 bucks to run.

Well I have a car, 1986 Ford Laser, 1.6L, a true POS type car,
but suits me perfectly.

I think its costs a total of approx aud $20 per week to run,
and maybe I do 150km.


ride to commute own a car as well, I'm not one of those although I have
ready access to my wife's car.

Plus there's the `free' exercise time and that thing few of us do these
days, time to oneself to think. I do a lot of thinking on my bike.

Fetch the heart pills, ahhh, the man says he thinks!!! :-)

Its difficult to think and maintain a hard on, but to ride and
think is another thing, especially up a long hard hill.

Of course it all depends upon what one thinks about...



in the UK where you're ten times more likely to die

Are there any theories to explain the big difference compared to
here?
Not that I'm aware of, although I haven't invested any time in to the
matter. When I was riding in the UK cycling was just another way you
got around and warranted no special consideration.

If I had to guess I'd pin it on the higher speeds that traffic
travels
at in the UK. For any given type of the road the speed limit's are
higher than in Australai.

We have 60k in most built up areas, 50k on smaller suburb roads,
and up to 110k on freeways.

Between 30 - 40 miles an hour on suburban roads, 60 miles an hour on
arterials and 70 miles an hour on dual carraigeways / motorways.

Its about the same here.

Patrick Turner.

--
EuanB

Theo Bekkers wrote:

Patrick Turner wrote:

But on Canberra's cycle paths its utterly different.
There simply isn't anything that will kill you.

Quite a few cyclist have died on roads in the ACT,
but I doubt a single one on the cycle paths in 30 +years.
My eyes tell me more ride the paths than ride the roads.

If you have an interest, check the body of evidence at
http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/research.html

Thanks for the link, but there's far more there than I have time to
read.

I know what I know, don't confuse me with facts?

Well I have some idea, but reports based on OS experiences leave room
for a lot of doubt.

Just because someone presents me with a a report on the existance
of "weapons of mass cystruction", it don't mean I am ever going to
believe it straightaway.



I think the bike lanes on roads make a huge difference, ie, a smooth
strip between gutter and car lane at least
1.2M wide and with an unbroken white line places the cyclist at
probably 1/10 of the normal risk.
I remember the days before the lanes went in here, and it definately
was far less safe.

In reality or in perception?

OK, my reality is mine, right, and not necessarily able to be
shared by any other cyclist.

But I know the before and after
effects of installing cycle lanes.

For me the lanes are a step forward, a great idea,
and maybe last month when a headstem broke, and I fell off,
i would have been run over had following traffic been unable to stop.
But no, there was no following motorists, because I was in the bike
lane,
and thus to my mind a terrible complication of breaking
my steering was avoided.



But there are many who don't like breathing all the car exhaust fumes
and dust from ground up brake and clutch linings.

If yer don't get rundown, yer get lung cancer.

You do know that cyclists breathe in many times more air than motorists?

Theo

All the more reason why they are more likely to get contaminents
to enter their lungs, where perhaps they'll lurk for years.

But when I train with Cadel, he manages to breathe only slightly
while I suck in about half the world's air supply to keep up.

Patrick Turner.

Theo Bekkers wrote:

Patrick Turner wrote:

But you forget one factor.

Add in the time taken to earn the money to pay for the motoring.
THEN the average time taken to do a distance becomes much greater,
and the bicycle wins easily.

Against a car, yes, but a 250cc motorcycle is cheaper to run on that basis.

But are not some 250cc bikes rather pricey?

I went through about 9 motorbikes between age 18 and 32.
I didn't drive until I was 28.
Most m'bikes were quite cheap second hand.
The last was BMWR75/5 that I had from 25 to 32, and i did 100,000miles.
I had saved up and paid cash for that, and it had 9,000 miles on it and
I paid about 1/2 the new price.
At 32, I sold it for the same number of $
which was about 1/2 the real price had been when I bought it.
Overall, the BM was cheap to run.
I had Honda90cc, then a 100cc while I saved.

Great for sydney traffic.

I saved 11 grand between 23 and 28, about equal to saving
about $120,000 now, from my average weekly earnings,
and while avoiding a lot of the extravagant stoopid spending habits of
most
of my peer group.

I bought a house easily when i needed to.

If I'd cycled, the travel would have taken a lot more out of me,
and taken time. From 22 to 27, I went to night tech to get
a Building Certificate. So I'd work 6 days a week on building sites,
and study at night, so for me there was no time or any real benefit in
riding
a bicycle, and not much saving to be had. But I didn't spend big
on cars, grog, food, cigarettes, racecourses, or dumb women who needed
huge funding.

What ppl get in wages is largely determined by the average cost
of living, and if everyone else demands a huge pay packet for
either extravagances, or for the expensive but noble action of
raising kids and buying a house, then if you do niether
then you can save a lot of dough.


We have 60k in most built up areas, 50k on smaller suburb roads,
and up to 110k on freeways.

And? When I was riding 12 kms to work in 25 mins, it was as quick as the car
and all 60 km/h zones. Why was that?

Often I have beaten buses going from Watson where I live to civic,
but mainly because they stop more often.

If I drive to Woden in peak hour, its much shorter than riding.

Canberra just hasn't got to the "silly point" where manual transport
is slower than the machine transport, as has happened in other cities,
and which makes the bicycle so attractive, if you don't mind the
fumes riding past stalled cars on their left.

When I came to the ACT from Sydney, I was used to 1.8 hrs of travel
to/from work on my BWM m'bike.

I travelled about 20minutes here.

In '78 I did have to travel to build a mail delivery centre
in Tuggeranong, 32 km which took well under 3/4 of an hour, each way.
At a cycling average of 25kph, that trip takes 1.5 hours.

The 30 yr old guys who race might average 32kph, and they get there a
bit quicker,
but they are going to travel for much longer than I would travel
in a car.

Since 1978, the trip time from here to the same place maybe takes
10mins longer by motor, and at 25kph, the bike takes the same time of
1.5hrs.

I can still manage this but I wouldn't like to have to do it 5 days a
week;
its a total of 320km a week, and frankly I would wear out.
My knees are not the same as Cadel's, let alone Oppie's,
and soon I would be a physical wreck after 320km a week at age 60.
I'd be so tired, and unable to think straight.

When I raced I knew guys who did ride 40km a day to and from work
and they were very hard to beat in races.

We can dream about beating the system in many ways.
Actually beating it is another thing.

I will stick with the affordable luxury of owning and running an
old Laser.

I don't think anything is as economically viable as catching a bus to
work and back.

But I work at home, so don't commute for work at all.
I avoid a large cost.

Patrick Turner.










Theo

See for yourself. Go sit on a busy road and count the cars and
bicycles that go past on one side of the road for 15 minutes, then do
the same for
15 minutes on the other side.

No thanks, it has already been done for me. Hence the figures I quoted. Your
figures are your perception, nothing to do with reality. I would be amazed
if Canberra cyclists only accounted for 0.5% of the traffic.

Theo

OK, but look, I said 0.5%. someone else says 5%, up near Perth's
figures,
if indeed they could be believed.

The difference between 0.5 and 5 is a factor of 10,
hardly much in statistics, because 0.5% or 5% is a small faction of
anything.

Pedal Power did a recent report on cyclist traffic which can be seen at

http://www.pedalpower.org.au/advocac...02004-2006.pdf

They conclude the numbers of cyclists has been rapidly increasing.

No mention has been made for motorists travelling to and from the same
"cordonned"
area where cyclists were observed and numbered while coming and going.

I think Pedal Power produced the report to
promote positive thinking amoung pollies and planners with regard to
cyclist amenities.

Great, and very wonderful to be sure, but cyclists are still a tiny
minority, and one mainly ignored,
and unless there were far more cyclists and a few more of them being
killed, nothing
much is ever going to be spent on them.

If there were 5% of road users being cyclists along NthB Ave, then
any time I road down there I'd expect to see several riders in the
distance, and several behind me.

And same thing on the other side of the Ave, with lots of ppl coming
past.
But I often ride to Civic over 7km and I see not a single other cyclist.
I'm the only curmudgeon to hog all that space the drivers are so furious
about.

But I see hundreds of cars, lots of lorries, and a few buses.

Patrick Turner.