|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
Theo Bekkers wrote: Zebee Johnstone wrote: Gags wrote: Is 70 cyclist fatalities a year only for Australia?? Seems really high to me as that is obviously nearly 1.5 casualties per week!!! Over all the states. Wouldn't surprise me, as I bet cyclist fatalities only get in the newspaper if there's something heart tugging about them or they need a filler. There are over 1500 car occupants killed a year, do you read about all of them? This is 4.1ppl a day, or 28.9 per week, or 19 times more ppl than those killed on bicycles. That is less than 1 cyclist killed for every dead motorist, or just under 5% of road fatalities. How would that relate to hours spent on the road? How much less safe per hour of road use are bicyles? Anybody know? Theo Ask yourself what's the ratio of motorists to cyclists when you take a look at the passing traffic. I reckon maybe 0.5% of traffic is a cyclist. I can wait 20 minutes on Northbourne Ave and see 2 guys go past on bicycles. How many hundred motorists? lots. And an occasional bus full of ppl. The cyclists probably don't ride as far as ppl drive, so the total bicycle kilometres travelled each day per annun in Oz probably is less than 0.5% of total motorvehicle distance travelled. But the ratio of dead cyclists to dead motorists isn't 1:200, 0r 0.5%, its allegedly about 1:20, or 5%. I guess this makes a bicycle 10 times more dangerous than being a motorist or being a passenger in a bus. One would think that the risk can be much reduced by riding only on quiet streets with little traffic, or on designated cycle paths away from main roads. But one main reason greenist politicians are mainly ignored when they implore everyone to ride to work is the danger ppl know exists when facing motorists armed with a tonne of iron, and defending themselves with only 500 grams of lycra. Patrick Turner. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
In aus.bicycle on Mon, 20 Aug 2007 08:57:00 GMT
Patrick Turner wrote: But one main reason greenist politicians are mainly ignored when they implore everyone to ride to work is the danger ppl know exists when facing motorists armed with a tonne of iron, and defending themselves with only 500 grams of lycra. So the solution is to do what they did with drink-driving. massive education campaign coupled with some really serious enforcement of laws. A few high profile cases of *careless* drivers who hit cyclists being imprisoned, a story every week how someone who was driving poorly was arrested and fined and had to leave their car cos they were taken to the copshop. A story every couple of weeks about a cyclist who reported a bad driver and the driver was convicted and lost their licence. Would take 2-3 years to start to have an effect... Zebee - who notes that some 4-5 years after motorcycle awareness campaigns were instituted in NSW, the number of car hits motorcycle crashes has recently dropped by something like 20%. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
Theo Bekkers Wrote: Zebee Johnstone wrote: Gags wrote: Is 70 cyclist fatalities a year only for Australia?? Seems really high to me as that is obviously nearly 1.5 casualties per week!!! Over all the states. Wouldn't surprise me, as I bet cyclist fatalities only get in the newspaper if there's something heart tugging about them or they need a filler. There are over 1500 car occupants killed a year, do you read about all of them? That is less than 1 cyclist killed for every dead motorist, or just under 5% of road fatalities. How would that relate to hours spent on the road? How much less safe per hour of road use are bicyles? Anybody know? Yep. 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.[1] That sounds bad but the risk of dying of road trauma is really quite small as a car occupant, multiply it by four and it's still quite small. Given that the British Medical Journal reckon the benefits to risk ration of cycling is 20:1 in the UK where you're ten times more likely to die, I reckon it's a good tradeoff. Let's not forget though that cycling is safer than walking ;-) [1]http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2005/pdf/Cross_modal_safety_comparisons.pdf Table 4 -- EuanB |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
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? in the UK where you're ten times more likely to die Are there any theories to explain the big difference compared to here? -- Shane Stanley |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
Zebee Johnstone wrote: In aus.bicycle on Mon, 20 Aug 2007 08:57:00 GMT Patrick Turner wrote: But one main reason greenist politicians are mainly ignored when they implore everyone to ride to work is the danger ppl know exists when facing motorists armed with a tonne of iron, and defending themselves with only 500 grams of lycra. So the solution is to do what they did with drink-driving. massive education campaign coupled with some really serious enforcement of laws. A few high profile cases of *careless* drivers who hit cyclists being imprisoned, a story every week how someone who was driving poorly was arrested and fined and had to leave their car cos they were taken to the copshop. A story every couple of weeks about a cyclist who reported a bad driver and the driver was convicted and lost their licence. Would take 2-3 years to start to have an effect... Zebee - who notes that some 4-5 years after motorcycle awareness campaigns were instituted in NSW, the number of car hits motorcycle crashes has recently dropped by something like 20%. I'd just love to see the politians get busy on the legislation changes and revisions and get funding grants going for the protection of cyclists by means of an education program. But politics works on the fickle nature of the public and on priorities and whether any votes are in it. Maybe you spend millions on campaigns and providing a secure new home for motoring murderers, and save 4 lives a year. What's the difference between running over a cyclist "by accident" to pranging into another vehicle and killing? If you have THE MOST draconian road laws possible, and publically hang offenders, you will STILL GET road kills. And even if we all took to horses and buggies, same thing. If you placed a 30 kph speed limit everywhere at all times, there'd still be troubles, as folks fell asleeep from boredom at the wheel. And goverments would quickly fall if they brought such measures in. Although I would love to see more spent on cyclists, I doubt much or enough will ever happen happen fast to reduce the lack of safety cyclists endure when mixing it with motorists. Any improvement tends to be glacial paced incrementals. There shalt not be any revolutions on the roads. Even a couple of years back the insurance cover on cycling to work was removed here. If you had a fall, or accident going to work, you could claim compo, but it was seen as a means of scamming by cyclists, and so they ride to work without cover. Is cycling encouraged? With one hand they give a few cycle lanes, and with the other they remove insurance, so presumably the number of cyclists doesn't increase much. Insurance isn't much joy to the relatives of someone who is brain damaged. Somehow I think the improvement and maintenance of a cycling infrastructure should be the priority. Perhaps the evidence is in the Netherlands, and europe, where bicycles have been more prominent. I ain't no expert, but I believe other countries may have the key to give us a better deal. Retro fitting Sydney with cycle lanes and off road bike paths that cyclists are going to WANT to ride on in preference to roads is a very big ask because of the pressure on utilising each valuable square inch of land. There isn't enough room for all the motorists, let alone giving road space as a luxurious tracks for cylists. And governments don't get any revenue from registration fees or petrol taxes if a large numbers of ppl take to bicycles, and porridge power to get to work. I am so glad I left Sydney to live in a relatively uncluttered environment of Canberra where the terrain of mainly rolling countryside without the awkward sandstone topology of Sydney makes the cycling very pleasant on many kms of dedicated bike paths well away from roads. Everyone is free to complain about cycling in cities such as Sydney, but it will never change fast enough, and I figured out I'd be far better off well out of the joint back in 1973. I've been back for 2 years since then for work, and am glad I returned here. Just how the hell I survived a year in 1988 riding all over Sydney in its traffic I don't really know. Its a lot worse now. As fast as some improvements are made, its back to square one, a dog chasing it tail, they make roads better and more cars are on them next day. I figured out early that people determined to live in Sydney had to be masochists. I thought everyone was piled high on everyone else, all putting on the agony, putting on the style, and always got weighed down paying housing loans off. Then they spent 3 hours a day commuting in cars, and 3 hours at work to pay for the motoring, and then pay a huge extra through the nose for a tiny property to be couped up like chooks in an egg shed. Big City Life IS basically all bull****. We are heroes at alienating ourselves from living as simple ppl. The main disease ppl have now is Affluenza, followed by Dollarobia, where the fear of not having enough keeps people jailed within a prison of society and vapid ideals. But I do like having a doctor and a dentist and PC tech handy when i need one, and plenty exist here but the ruthless presence of the BIG CITY isn't quite so in my face. Someone asked, "But doncha miss the beaches?" My answer is that I don't really fit into a beach culture. And the cost of yachting on the Harbour is akin to tearing up $100 bills and throwing them overboard. I'm too busy, and I cannot have what i see what walks on Balmoral beach at 2pm, in summer.... If you ain't a rich poseur, and you ain't young, you don't belong in too many places now. I see Sydney as a great big old sleasy whore who blows smoke in your face everywhere you go, and grabs every last buck you have, and while giving very little in return. And a bicycle journey is just a pain in the arse. Sydney has little option to be fresh, young, and inviting because a huge number keep knocking at her door wanting a place to live, work, enjoy and then die, preferably after getting at least moderately wealthy over a lifetime. Hardly any of the new comers want to ride a bicycle; that's all too second class, and they don't understand the middle class passion for fitness amoung that determined minority of mainly young men who do a lot on porridge power. So making things better for cyclists isn't really on the city father's minds. There are always rather many important priorities. Patrick Turner. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
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? in the UK where you're ten times more likely to die Are there any theories to explain the big difference compared to here? -- Shane Stanley I always thought motocyclists had far riskier lives and endured a lower life expectancy than motorists in cars, buses, and lorries. I would hazard a guess that while you are on a busy road as a cyclist, and without a bike lane, you'd be more prone to a shorter life than our motorcyclist bretheren. But once you ride only on dedicated off road cycle paths, then the risk plummets, and perhaps you live to 91, as Opperman did, and die while on the exercise bike, after having ridden further and faster than just about anyone ever has. Oppie was a real hero of the spoked wheel. And he survived for so long, but one must recal the roads upon which he rode were fairly uncluttered, as mainly only the rich had cars. How did he survive? If Oppie was a young fella of 25 now, would he be seen on the roads? One can only wonder, but it seems ppl in China can't wait to not have to ride their bikes... and western country roads are fully choked right up... What's the ratio of life expectancy of cyclists in Bathurst, or Geelong, compared to those in central Sydney or Melbourne? I guess the expectancy is another silly statistical peice of BS because the expectancy of life falls as you mount a bike, and then rises when you get off. Patrick Turner. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
Patrick Turner 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? in the UK where you're ten times more likely to die Are there any theories to explain the big difference compared to here? -- Shane Stanley I always thought motocyclists had far riskier lives and endured a lower life expectancy than motorists in cars, buses, and lorries. I would hazard a guess that while you are on a busy road as a cyclist, and without a bike lane, you'd be more prone to a shorter life than our motorcyclist bretheren. But once you ride only on dedicated off road cycle paths, then the risk plummets, You'd think so wouldn't you? I did but studies and research strongly suggest that a cyclist fares best when riding as a part of normal traffic. If you have an interest, check the body of evidence at http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/research.html -- EuanB |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
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. 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. -- EuanB |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
In aus.bicycle on Tue, 21 Aug 2007 06:13:43 +1000
EuanB wrote: 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. 30km would be at the upper end for utility trips? At first I thought "OK for some" but then I realised that the fastest trip to work on the motorcycle is about 35 mins, the peak hour one is more like 45 (with lanesplitting) which compares better to the 70 by bicycle. Peak hour by car doesn't bear thinking about! 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. Is there a breakdown between urban and non? I suspect urban UK roads in most cities are narrower and more congested with cars and peds than those in most Oz cities. Zebee |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
In article ,
EuanB wrote: 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. But are the majority of cycling miles utility trips? I would have thought there'd be at least a ratio of something 2:3 between time and distance figures. 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. Does this suggest that attitude matters less than road conditions, or is the attitude to cyclists similar in England? -- Shane Stanley |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Club cyclists in safety video. | Simon Mason | UK | 4 | December 9th 06 02:53 PM |
CBR: Tuggeranong Vikings CC Novice Road Cycling Program | Bean Long | Australia | 4 | September 11th 06 01:33 AM |
Exercise Program for Cyclists | Jeff Starr | General | 35 | September 27th 05 07:13 AM |
The best way to improve safety for cyclists in a city... | Paul R | General | 264 | December 10th 04 11:01 PM |
The best way to improve safety for cyclists in a city... | Paul R | Social Issues | 43 | November 23rd 04 10:14 PM |