SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists

PiledHigher wrote:
On Aug 21, 2:52 pm, EuanB EuanB.2vn...@no-
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com wrote:
Theo Bekkers Wrote:

PiledHigher wrote:
On Aug 21, 11:16 am, "Theo Bekkers"
wrote:

Did you know that most cyclist accidents do not involve another
vehicle?

Bit most fatal ones do involve another vehicle.

I don't know. Do you have some stats on that?

Theo

Don't know about Australia but in the UK 87% of cycling fatalities
involve another vehicle. I don't have a cite handy.

--
EuanB

"ATSB ROAD SAFETY REPORT
July 2006
Deaths of cyclists due to road crashes

In the fifteen years from 1991 to 2005, 665 cyclists were killed in
road crashes. In
this period there were 661 road crashes in which a cyclist was killed,
i.e. very few
of these crashes involved the death of more than one cyclist. Based on
unpublished
ABS 'cause of death' data for the period 1997 to 2004 (the latest
period for which
such data are available) it is observed that about 86 per cent of
cyclist deaths
resulted from a collision between their bicycle and a motor vehicle
(Table 2)."

Thanks for that. Pretty much what I expected.

Theo

Theo Bekkers Wrote:
EuanB wrote:
Patrick Turner Wrote:

But not if you have dodgy knees or some other ailment that does not
respond well to vigourous exercise.

Last October I smashed my leg up. I drove the shin bone through the
knee in to the thigh bone, shattering the top of the shin bone and
caused extensive damage to the meniscous. The term for the injury is
a tibial palteau, otherwise known as a fender bender.

Ouch, and ouch.

Not at the time. Drunk as a lord, it's still a mystery as to how I
actually did it. Bikesoiler will tell you it was to get out of the
working bee the following morning (kidding, he hasn't intimated
anything of the sort. Suspiscious timing on my part though :P).

Nope, I was an idiot, had too much Beligian beer and PFO'd. No
sympathy for me please, save it for someone deserving.

In retrospect it was quite a fascinating experience, the muscle
wastage, the after effects of aneasthetic, rehabilitation. One I'd
happily forgo but all in all it wasn't that bad an experience and I've
a wicked scar. Shame I haven't a wicked story to go with it ;-)

[1] (actually Bikesoiler did mention that if I'd stuck with Goat it
wouldn't have happened and this was the micro-brewerie gods' way of
castigating me for my desertion)


--
EuanB

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 13:10:10 +0000, Patrick Turner wrote:

If desperate, jump into local nearby river.

Then how do I wash off the ferry?

--
Dave Hughes |
"First things first, but not necessarily in that order." - The Doctor

Bean Long wrote:

Patrick Turner wrote:

The trick question is, how many cars are there and how many cyclists
are there on Canberra's roads at any given time on average 24/7?

There are now around 110,000 households in Canberra, and about 330,000
ppl,
and don't tell me 330,000 cars could be driven towards Civic if everyone
wanted to.

This is just my point Pat. There wouldn't be that many cars heading to
Civic at any one time. Hence, cylists are clearly a lot more than 0.5%
of total traffic just heading into Civic of a morning between 7:30 and
9:00. Unfortunatley PP don't collect data for other traffic but it seems
clear that there is a substantial and growing number of cyclists on
Canberra's roads during peak periods.

PP only made ONE point, that the number of cyclists has increased a lot.

Only blind freddy could disagree.

I say that on average, 24/7, there might be 5 cyclists on the move
anywhere
for every 1,000 ppl in cars, buses, and lorries.

That's 0.5%.

5% means there would be 50 cyclists per thousand motorists.

In peak hour, if you watch main roads which have a cycle lane, is there
one cyclist passing
for every 19 vehicles? Maybe sometimes there would be.

But averaged over 24/7, its a different story.

Just what % there actually IS has yet to be established, but lemme
tellya,
whatever the %, they will be ignored if there are no votes are attached
to paying them attention.

And for most of the time, Goverments don't act, they
just make sure they are seen to be doing something,
while actually doing SFA.
Honest auditors will confirm this.

Has 0.5% of road infrastructure funding been granted to cyclists?

Maybe.

Patrick Turner.



Bean

Remove "yourfinger" before replying

Bean Long wrote:

Patrick Turner wrote:

I spend half my life reading and studying and figuring.

And the other half posting to a.b?

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.

Maybe the case for newspaper letters, but certainly not for a.b. We all
have rather short attention spans around here! :-)

How much do you read?

As little as possible

What flows from your reading?

A whopping headache usually!

--
Bean

Remove "yourfinger" before replying

Its OK Bean.

I have never set out to please all the people all the time.

I won't apologise to those I displease unless they set out a better
point of view
carefully in long and detailed arguments.

That'd make me a stubborn old curmudgeon, but
there is no accounting for perceptions :-)

Happy cycling,

Patrick Turner.

Bean Long wrote:

Patrick Turner wrote:

The average age of death in Oz is much less than 91.

The question is clearly what is the average age at death (as you put it)
for the average Australian who doesn't ride a bike, compared to the
average Australian who rides a bike. Sure, it's no gurantee that it will
make you live longer but the hope is that on average a cyclists
longevity is increased over his fat-arsed compatriots.

I am sure the available statistics somewhere will show
that fit slim people last longer and require less medical repair funding
than unfit fat people.

Someone did say that only the good die young.

If someone unremarkable dies at 70, its just an old guy dying.
But if he's good, then we miss him and his youthful 70 years,
and the promise of another 30 years of goodness flow.

Life is strange though, good, bad, fat, slim, values, sheesh......

Headache? take an Aspro.

Patrick Turner.


--
Bean

Remove "yourfinger" before replying

Bean Long wrote:

Patrick Turner wrote:
stuff about his knees

Not to sound too flippant Pat, but a good series of appropriate
stretches could well help. Most of us have suffered knee pain of some
sort as a result of cycling and in most cases it's down to tight ITB's
or other knee realted ligaments and muscles. I'm just recovering from 2
months off the bike due to knee pain now.

--
Bean

Remove "yourfinger" before replying

I'll try not to agravate your headache, but, when I began seriously
competing
on a bike in 1986, while working as a contract builder, my back
and knees both played up, and I did a couple of courses in Hatha Yoga.
Maybe you can laugh (if it don't hurt your aching brain), but
yoga kept me mobile for 6 years after the innitial courses.
I found I was able to reduce what I did to a minimum of 10 minutes a day
right after a ride, and basically what i did was a few simple
meditative stretches.

But after 6 years of competition in 1992, nothing eased the pains and
aches I began to have.

Quitting cycling worked, and I was just fine for some years, and then
more troubles....

Lugging bucket fulls of mortar up a ladder for a week to re-point roof
tiles
at a house I was re-furbishing stuffed my knees for months, then my back
went
for 6 months, after helping someone move house, and I realized there
were some things I could no longer do
without considerable risk of injury. OK when you are 25,
but at 50 things change.

The 50km I did today went fine, mainly on flattish paths/roads, but
niggling pains tomorrow
might have me think I still could be "over cooking it".

At 25, 150km a day each day is doable, 750km per 5 days.
One would need to rest on the weekend.

At 85, maybe 15km a day, if you are alive.

Between the two ages, and at some age, say 40, or 60, there must be a
distance which is sustainable.

Patrick Turner.

Bean Long wrote:

Patrick Turner wrote:

Never barrel on through a situation you feel could be dodgy.
That's when **** happens :-[

Agreed absolutely.

--
Bean

Remove "yourfinger" before replying

Headache better now?

Patrick Turner.

Patrick Turner wrote:
Theo Bekkers wrote:

You're dribbling Pat.

You sound both foolhardy and under-educated to say that..
Not to mention plain disrespectful.

I nevah had much edumicasion Pat. Never got past year 12. I suppose I could
count the year in London and later another year in the US learning about
first gen solid state computers, but that would be Industry training,
wouldn't it?

My mother told me to respect my elders. You're not. :-)

Have you ever been forced away from something you like
because your body cannot keep the appointments listed by the brain?

No.

The fact is that many ppl could not and most definately would not
ride a bicycle, ever.

And there are lots and lots of reasons, apart from not having been
born with ideal knees for cycling.

I think that's nonsense Pat.

You have your perceptions which you trot out regularly, ignoring all
facts. So you won't object if I trot out mine. My perception is that
my granddad lived to 96, my dad is currently 93 and in good health.
Ergo, everybody lives longer than Oppie.

When your number comes up, just joke with the nurses and say goodbye
all,
and hello nothing.

I could say you have your perceptions which you trot out regularly,
ignoring all facts.
But I won't say that. See, I haven't said that.

Even I listen to facts occasionally. Haven't you yet noticed that no-one
here agrees with your view of the cycling world? Do you think none of the
people posting here have anything like your grasp of roadcraft?

The regular use of bicycles DOES NOT gurantee you will live to 91, or
100, whatever.

Did I say it does?

The average age of death in Oz is much less than 91.

I think what you call a perception of yours needs to be challenged.

That would be a whoosh Patrick.

Theo

Patrick Turner wrote:

Headache? take an Aspro.

I thought it was "a Bex and a good lie down".

Theo