A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

DfT Stats - 2009



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 26th 10, 03:01 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.tranpsort,cam.transport,uk.rec.driving
JMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,929
Default DfT Stats - 2009

I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009
It is of course of note that if you look at the stats - you will see
that for cars, vans, motorcycles, pedal cycles and pedestrians all
figures (except one) compared with 2008 have gone down.

Which of those figures is the only one to have gone up?

Yep - Killed and seriously injured on a pedal cycle.

It looks like cycling gets more dangerous year on year.


Ads
  #2  
Old November 27th 10, 01:38 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling,cam.transport,uk.rec.driving
PhilO
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,130
Default DfT Stats - 2009

On Nov 26, 2:01*pm, JMS wrote:
I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009
It is of course of note that if you look at the stats - you will see
that for cars, vans, motorcycles, pedal cycles and pedestrians all
figures (except one) compared with 2008 have gone down.

Which of those figures is the only one to have gone up?

Yep - Killed and seriously injured on a pedal cycle.

It looks like cycling gets more dangerous year on year.


Judith,

Are you deliberately trying to deceive?

TSGB0107 shows pedal cycle Killed decreased from 24 in 2008 to 21 in
2009 - a 12.5% decrease
KSI has increased from 541 to 547 - a 1% increase.

Do you think the 1% change statistically significant?

Why did you fail to report the much larger decrease in cyclist Killed?

And Judith, how did you miss this statistic:

Killed per billion passenger km: Pedal cycle 21, Pedestrian 26.

So, Judith, doesn't that mean you are more likely to die walking a
mile than cycling a mile?


I wondered why you didn't post a link to the data. Did you not want
others to see it? I found it he
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...r/tsgb0107.xls

Thanks for letting me know these figures were out.

PhilO
  #3  
Old November 27th 10, 04:16 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling,cam.transport,uk.rec.driving
Derek C
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,431
Default DfT Stats - 2009

On Nov 27, 12:38*am, PhilO wrote:
On Nov 26, 2:01*pm, JMS wrote:

I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009
It is of course of note that if you look at the stats - you will see
that for cars, vans, motorcycles, pedal cycles and pedestrians all
figures (except one) compared with 2008 have gone down.


Which of those figures is the only one to have gone up?


Yep - Killed and seriously injured on a pedal cycle.


It looks like cycling gets more dangerous year on year.


Judith,

Are you deliberately trying to deceive?

TSGB0107 shows pedal cycle Killed decreased from 24 in 2008 to 21 in
2009 - a 12.5% decrease
KSI has increased from 541 to 547 - a 1% increase.

Do you think the 1% change statistically significant?

Why did you fail to report the much larger decrease in cyclist Killed?

And Judith, how did you miss this statistic:

Killed per billion passenger km: Pedal cycle 21, Pedestrian 26.

So, Judith, doesn't that mean you are more likely to die walking a
mile than cycling a mile?

I wondered why you didn't post a link to the data. Did you not want
others to see it? I found it hehttp://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...ions/modal/pas...

Thanks for letting me know these figures were out.

PhilO


But also note that cycling has a much higher death and serious injury
rate than cars or vans. I make it that cycling is 32 times more
dangerous than motoring, with 547 cycling KSI per billion passenger
kilometres against 17 for cars in 2009. The overall casualty rate for
push bikes is actually quite close to motorcycles 3447 to 3665. The
lower KSI rate is probably only because cyclists tend to have lower
speed accidents than motorcyclists. Despite public perception, the
rate for aviation is pretty close to zero.

Derek C
  #4  
Old November 27th 10, 05:14 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling,cam.transport,uk.rec.driving
JMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,929
Default DfT Stats - 2009

On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 16:38:32 -0800 (PST), PhilO
wrote:

snip


I wondered why you didn't post a link to the data. Did you not want
others to see it? I found it he
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...r/tsgb0107.xls

Thanks for letting me know these figures were out.

PhilO



Of course I knew that no other poster would know where to find the
figures.

But bugger me - you have managed to. I suppose you had quite a clue
with :

"I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009"

You can try and put any gloss on the figures - yes the number actually
killed was three down on last year.

I understand that that is because the numbers using cycle helmets has
gone up again - hence fewer deaths as the accident rate goes up.

But in a nutshell - of all modes of transport - the only killed or
seriously injured figure which went up per billion miles traveled was
cycling.

KSI for all other modes went down.

  #5  
Old November 27th 10, 06:21 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling,cam.transport,uk.rec.driving
Tom Crispin[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default DfT Stats - 2009

On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 19:16:27 -0800 (PST), Derek C
wrote:

On Nov 27, 12:38*am, PhilO wrote:
On Nov 26, 2:01*pm, JMS wrote:

I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009
It is of course of note that if you look at the stats - you will see
that for cars, vans, motorcycles, pedal cycles and pedestrians all
figures (except one) compared with 2008 have gone down.


Which of those figures is the only one to have gone up?


Yep - Killed and seriously injured on a pedal cycle.


It looks like cycling gets more dangerous year on year.


Judith,

Are you deliberately trying to deceive?

TSGB0107 shows pedal cycle Killed decreased from 24 in 2008 to 21 in
2009 - a 12.5% decrease
KSI has increased from 541 to 547 - a 1% increase.

Do you think the 1% change statistically significant?

Why did you fail to report the much larger decrease in cyclist Killed?

And Judith, how did you miss this statistic:

Killed per billion passenger km: Pedal cycle 21, Pedestrian 26.

So, Judith, doesn't that mean you are more likely to die walking a
mile than cycling a mile?

I wondered why you didn't post a link to the data. Did you not want
others to see it? I found it hehttp://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...ions/modal/pas...

Thanks for letting me know these figures were out.

PhilO


But also note that cycling has a much higher death and serious injury
rate than cars or vans. I make it that cycling is 32 times more
dangerous than motoring, with 547 cycling KSI per billion passenger
kilometres against 17 for cars in 2009. The overall casualty rate for
push bikes is actually quite close to motorcycles 3447 to 3665. The
lower KSI rate is probably only because cyclists tend to have lower
speed accidents than motorcyclists. Despite public perception, the
rate for aviation is pretty close to zero.


In assessing the most dangerous type of vehicle, it would be useful to
know how many cyclists died after a collision with a motor vehicle;
how many cyclists died after a collision with a bicycle; how many
drivers and passengers died after a collision with a motor vehicle;
and how many drivers; and passengers died after a collision with a
bicycle.
  #6  
Old November 27th 10, 10:08 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling,cam.transport,uk.rec.driving
Justin[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,530
Default DfT Stats - 2009

On 27 nov, 01:38, PhilO wrote:
On Nov 26, 2:01*pm, JMS wrote:

I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009
It is of course of note that if you look at the stats - you will see
that for cars, vans, motorcycles, pedal cycles and pedestrians all
figures (except one) compared with 2008 have gone down.


Which of those figures is the only one to have gone up?


Yep - Killed and seriously injured on a pedal cycle.


It looks like cycling gets more dangerous year on year.


Judith,

Are you deliberately trying to deceive?

TSGB0107 shows pedal cycle Killed decreased from 24 in 2008 to 21 in
2009 - a 12.5% decrease
KSI has increased from 541 to 547 - a 1% increase.

Do you think the 1% change statistically significant?

Why did you fail to report the much larger decrease in cyclist Killed?

And Judith, how did you miss this statistic:

Killed per billion passenger km: Pedal cycle 21, Pedestrian 26.

So, Judith, doesn't that mean you are more likely to die walking a
mile than cycling a mile?

I wondered why you didn't post a link to the data. Did you not want
others to see it? I found it hehttp://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...ions/modal/pas...

Thanks for letting me know these figures were out.

PhilO


Thanks Phil. I am seriously contemplating one of two courses of
action:
1) giving up pedestrian activity or
2) donning protective clothing and headgear before venturing out upon
the pavements of Great Britain.

Has anyone any idea what JMS's agenda is when she posts this half-
information? She refuses to be unequivocal about this.
  #7  
Old November 27th 10, 10:10 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling,cam.transport,uk.rec.driving
Justin[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,530
Default DfT Stats - 2009

On 27 nov, 05:14, JMS wrote:
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 16:38:32 -0800 (PST), PhilO
wrote:

snip

I wondered why you didn't post a link to the data. Did you not want
others to see it? I found it he
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...ions/modal/pas...


Thanks for letting me know these figures were out.


PhilO


Of course I knew that no other poster would know where to find the
figures.

But bugger me - you have managed to. *I suppose you had quite a clue
with :

"I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009"

You can try and put any gloss on the figures - yes the number actually
killed was three down on last year.

I understand that that is because *the numbers using cycle helmets has
gone up again - hence fewer deaths as the accident rate goes up.

But in a nutshell - of all modes of transport - the only killed or
seriously injured figure *which went up per billion miles traveled was
cycling.

KSI for all other modes went down.


travelled! Nice mistake from someone who choses to comment on others'
English.
  #8  
Old November 27th 10, 10:15 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling,cam.transport,uk.rec.driving
Justin[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,530
Default DfT Stats - 2009

On 27 nov, 06:21, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 19:16:27 -0800 (PST), Derek C



wrote:
On Nov 27, 12:38 am, PhilO wrote:
On Nov 26, 2:01 pm, JMS wrote:


I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009
It is of course of note that if you look at the stats - you will see
that for cars, vans, motorcycles, pedal cycles and pedestrians all
figures (except one) compared with 2008 have gone down.


Which of those figures is the only one to have gone up?


Yep - Killed and seriously injured on a pedal cycle.


It looks like cycling gets more dangerous year on year.


Judith,


Are you deliberately trying to deceive?


TSGB0107 shows pedal cycle Killed decreased from 24 in 2008 to 21 in
2009 - a 12.5% decrease
KSI has increased from 541 to 547 - a 1% increase.


Do you think the 1% change statistically significant?


Why did you fail to report the much larger decrease in cyclist Killed?


And Judith, how did you miss this statistic:


Killed per billion passenger km: Pedal cycle 21, Pedestrian 26.


So, Judith, doesn't that mean you are more likely to die walking a
mile than cycling a mile?


I wondered why you didn't post a link to the data. Did you not want
others to see it? I found it hehttp://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...ions/modal/pas...


Thanks for letting me know these figures were out.


PhilO


But also note that cycling has a much higher death and serious injury
rate than cars or vans. I make it that cycling is 32 times more
dangerous than motoring, with 547 cycling KSI per billion passenger
kilometres against 17 for cars in 2009. The overall casualty rate for
push bikes is actually quite close to motorcycles 3447 to 3665. The
lower KSI rate is probably only because cyclists tend to have lower
speed accidents than motorcyclists. Despite public perception, the
rate for aviation is pretty close to zero.


In assessing the most dangerous type of vehicle, it would be useful to
know how many cyclists died after a collision with a motor vehicle;
how many cyclists died after a collision with a bicycle; how many
drivers and passengers died after a collision with a motor vehicle;
and how many drivers; and passengers died after a collision with a
bicycle.


Exactly, Chris. There is a danger here that people such as JMS and her
ilk will reach the following conclusion:

"Cycling is dangerous. Cycling should be regulated or banned."

What JMS and others resolutely avoid mentioning is that the danger to
cyclists is predominantly formed by motorised traffic combined with
the pathetic facilities and protection afforded to cyclists by the
British Government. Cycling has become so dangerous in GB that I no
longer train there when visiting: unfortunately the more that adopt my
viewpoint the easier it is for the anti-cycling lobby to argue that
there is little demand for the facilities to which I refer. A self-
fulfilling prophecy if there ever was one.
  #9  
Old November 27th 10, 10:15 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling,cam.transport,uk.rec.driving
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 322
Default DfT Stats - 2009

In article ,
PhilO wrote:

Judith,

Are you deliberately trying to deceive?


No - just troll.

TSGB0107 shows pedal cycle Killed decreased from 24 in 2008 to 21 in
2009 - a 12.5% decrease
KSI has increased from 541 to 547 - a 1% increase.

Do you think the 1% change statistically significant?


Do you think that the 12.5% is, either?

Why did you fail to report the much larger decrease in cyclist Killed?


Numerically, it's only 3 versus 6. Statistically, neither are
significant at even the 20% level.

And Judith, how did you miss this statistic:

Killed per billion passenger km: Pedal cycle 21, Pedestrian 26.


Well, I could explain why it is deceptive - as are the raw numbers.
The KSI rate per trip might well show a statistically significant
increase, but none of the figures are reliable and meaningful
enough to draw definite conclusions from.

So, Judith, doesn't that mean you are more likely to die walking a
mile than cycling a mile?


No. Using population statistics (ESPECIALLY ones calculated in
the way that those have been) doesn't indicate individual risk at
all well.

I suggest that you ignore JMS's trolling - and don't post equally
bogus figures in return!


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
  #10  
Old November 27th 10, 12:20 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,cam.transport,uk.rec.driving
Mr. Benn[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 300
Default DfT Stats - 2009

wrote in message ...

In article
,
PhilO wrote:

Judith,

Are you deliberately trying to deceive?


No - just troll.

TSGB0107 shows pedal cycle Killed decreased from 24 in 2008 to 21 in
2009 - a 12.5% decrease
KSI has increased from 541 to 547 - a 1% increase.

Do you think the 1% change statistically significant?


Do you think that the 12.5% is, either?

Why did you fail to report the much larger decrease in cyclist Killed?


Numerically, it's only 3 versus 6. Statistically, neither are
significant at even the 20% level.

And Judith, how did you miss this statistic:

Killed per billion passenger km: Pedal cycle 21, Pedestrian 26.


Well, I could explain why it is deceptive - as are the raw numbers.
The KSI rate per trip might well show a statistically significant
increase, but none of the figures are reliable and meaningful
enough to draw definite conclusions from.

So, Judith, doesn't that mean you are more likely to die walking a
mile than cycling a mile?


No. Using population statistics (ESPECIALLY ones calculated in
the way that those have been) doesn't indicate individual risk at
all well.

I suggest that you ignore JMS's trolling - and don't post equally
bogus figures in return!


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
================

Path: nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk

Says it all really. A server used by psycholists.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tire stats Sandy Techniques 26 February 14th 09 06:27 AM
Stats Doki UK 5 May 2nd 08 09:45 PM
2007 stats BraveSirStupid Unicycling 2 January 14th 08 06:54 PM
more stats Andre Racing 0 May 23rd 06 10:59 PM
RBR Stats Papai Digital Racing 11 November 1st 04 11:03 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.