London "Danger! Danger!"

On 2013-12-10 01:29:47 +0000, Frank Krygowski said:

"Boris bikes" and other factors have greatly increased cycling in
London. Fatalities have been dropping. This year's fatality count is
no greater than last year's, and is less than previous years', despite
increased cycling. But because there was a cluster of deaths in one
month, 1000 cyclists lay down in a "die in" protest because cycling is
so dangerous. Safer than before - but newly dangerous, somehow.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...death-protests


Meanwhile, the number of pedestrian deaths is once again far higher
than the number of cyclist deaths.

Yeah, we've talked about this. Just thought you'd like to hear about
the "die in." And the fact that such protests probably do dissuade
people from cycling. You know, "Danger! Danger!"

- Frank Krygowski

why are you so obessed with this that you bringing it up again and
again. London is not a pleasant place to ride bike and this has nothing
to do with them riding at the wrong side of the road.


--

Lou

On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 10:21:09 AM UTC-8, Duane wrote:
On 12/10/2013 11:41 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:

Jay Beattie writes:

It is not because it has gotten that much worse in the last 20

years (although I got passed by a bus this morning by literally

an inch at 45mph), but riders are much less "tough."



Some of the bus drivers around here like to honk as they pass a

cyclist, for no reason that I can see. If I ever get the

opportunity, I will ask one why they do it.





Maybe to let you know that they see you.



A couple of cyclists were killed in Montreal by buses. Due to the

public outcry from cyclists and some cycling organizations, bus drivers

now have to go through training on dealing with cyclists. Buses have

different mirrors that may help them see cyclists better.



And the most bizarre thing is that they now seem to be the most polite

vehicles on the road when coming into contact with cyclists. I imagine

that's because the "training" probably mentioned job loss when they hit

one of us. But it's weird having a bus stop for you and blocking the

other traffic. I'm used to the same bus drivers that Jay describes.

I got a super close pass from a bus again today -- but not a transit bus. It was a tour bus, and I was in a bike lane. I must be a bus magnet this week.

I was riding in a dusting of snow and ice, too, but luckily, I was riding on studded tires which have great grip. The pavement has already cleared off, so the trip home is going to be noisy. I'm riding my son's old Kona Dewdrop, and with studs, it's like driving a half-track. I hate it when the snow melts off, and I'm the dork on the studs. I prefer being the awesome old dude dominating the snow and crushing other riders who are squirming along on their inadequate tires.

TECHNICAL TOPIC CHANGE: Anyone have a great technique for beading difficult tires. My studs love to hang up and not bead, so they are like riding on square tires. Running up the pressure doesn't do the trick. I could soap them up before mounting, but short of that, anyone have tried and true technique?

-- Jay Beattie.

On 12/10/2013 1:19 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 10:21:09 AM UTC-8, Duane wrote:
On 12/10/2013 11:41 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:

Jay Beattie writes:

It is not because it has gotten that much worse in the last 20

years (although I got passed by a bus this morning by literally

an inch at 45mph), but riders are much less "tough."



Some of the bus drivers around here like to honk as they pass a

cyclist, for no reason that I can see. If I ever get the

opportunity, I will ask one why they do it.





Maybe to let you know that they see you.



A couple of cyclists were killed in Montreal by buses. Due to the

public outcry from cyclists and some cycling organizations, bus drivers

now have to go through training on dealing with cyclists. Buses have

different mirrors that may help them see cyclists better.



And the most bizarre thing is that they now seem to be the most polite

vehicles on the road when coming into contact with cyclists. I imagine

that's because the "training" probably mentioned job loss when they hit

one of us. But it's weird having a bus stop for you and blocking the

other traffic. I'm used to the same bus drivers that Jay describes.

I got a super close pass from a bus again today -- but not a transit bus. It was a tour bus, and I was in a bike lane. I must be a bus magnet this week.

I was riding in a dusting of snow and ice, too, but luckily, I was riding on studded tires which have great grip. The pavement has already cleared off, so the trip home is going to be noisy. I'm riding my son's old Kona Dewdrop, and with studs, it's like driving a half-track. I hate it when the snow melts off, and I'm the dork on the studs. I prefer being the awesome old dude dominating the snow and crushing other riders who are squirming along on their inadequate tires.

TECHNICAL TOPIC CHANGE: Anyone have a great technique for beading difficult tires. My studs love to hang up and not bead, so they are like riding on square tires. Running up the pressure doesn't do the trick. I could soap them up before mounting, but short of that, anyone have tried and true technique?

-- Jay Beattie.


Spray a light schpritz of furniture polish inside the rim
before mounting your tire (much like car tire mounting goop
but less messy). If it's still recalcitrant, place the wheel
over a trash can when you air it, so the tire is as centered
as it can be.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 12/10/2013 3:07 AM, Duane wrote:

snip

I've not ridden in London though I've had a Londoner describe it to me. If
more than a thousand cyclists felt strongly enough to stage that protest
maybe they had a reason. And it looks like their effort will be motivating
the city to action of sorts.

Clearly someone in Ohio knows more about the situation in London than
the cyclists in London.

Really it's one thing to bitch about the Danger! Danger! crowd when it's
ill informed politicians but when it's cyclists trying to effect change
it's hard to criticize.

The problem is really ill-informed cyclists (well maybe that should not
be plural) claiming to understand what's going on in London.

On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 2:19:40 PM UTC-5, Jay Beattie wrote:

I got a super close pass from a bus again today -- but not a transit bus. It was a tour bus, and I was in a bike lane. I must be a bus magnet this week.

Since there was a bike lane stripe, he "knew" that you'd never cross the stripe, so he could pass as close as he liked.

TECHNICAL TOPIC CHANGE: Anyone have a great technique for beading difficult tires. My studs love to hang up and not bead, so they are like riding on square tires. Running up the pressure doesn't do the trick. I could soap them up before mounting, but short of that, anyone have tried and true technique?

There's only one wheel/tire in the family that has had that problem, an old 3-speed set up for shopping that doesn't get much use. It has old steel rims. I finally got it to seat by lubing with liquid soap, pumping way over its supposed max pressure, and strongly working the tire side to side. It wasn't easy, but it eventually worked.

- Frank Krygowski

On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 3:00:10 PM UTC-5, sms wrote:
On 12/10/2013 3:07 AM, Duane wrote:


I've not ridden in London though I've had a Londoner describe it to me. If
more than a thousand cyclists felt strongly enough to stage that protest
maybe they had a reason. And it looks like their effort will be motivating
the city to action of sorts.

Clearly someone in Ohio knows more about the situation in London than
the cyclists in London.

Really it's one thing to bitch about the Danger! Danger! crowd when it's
ill informed politicians but when it's cyclists trying to effect change
it's hard to criticize.

The problem is really ill-informed cyclists (well maybe that should not
be plural) claiming to understand what's going on in London.

"The number of cyclists killed in London this year was too many – but it is in fact precisely the same as it was at this point last year, and less than the year before."

The protest at issue was in reaction to a cluster of deaths in one month. Until that month, this year's fatality total was less than last year's at matching dates. Does that mean that London was safer until November, and in November it suddenly got far more dangerous than it had ever been? Doubtful.

Granted, I haven't cycled in London. I assume there are things that can be done to make cycling safer, because there are always things that can be done to make cycling safer. (I have no problem with restrictions on HGVs, for example.) But one question is, how far should a city reasonably be expected to go? A related question is, if one can visualize some way to make cycling safer, is it then necessary to shout "Cycling is too dangerous!!"? I think not.

I do have two very good friends, the most dedicated transportation cyclists I know, who spent a year working in London not long ago. When I asked them how London was for cycling, they said "How was it?? Fine!" sort of surprised I asked. They then went into more detail, adding that it was much faster for them to do their commute by bike than by any other possible means.

Granted, they are extremely competent in traffic. They certainly know enough to not ride up on the blind side of a turning truck.

Like me, they tend to be suspicious of "special" facilities for bikes. That may be partly because of bad experiences. I know that the woman broke her arm or wrist (I forget which) when, in a Mandatory Side Path state, she was forced to ride on a weird and sub-standard cycle track with a pavement hazard she couldn't negotiate.

In any case, how dangerous is "too dangerous!!!"? Johnson said "[Don't] obscure the fact that the number of deaths per bike journey taken in London has more than halved in the last 10 years, to one death in every 15m journeys."

Ten years ago, I don't recall thousands of cyclists doing "die-ins" because cycling was so dangerous. It's twice as safe now.

- Frank Krygowski

"Frank Krygowski" wrote in message ...
"Boris bikes" and other factors have greatly increased cycling in London. Fatalities have been dropping. This year's fatality count is no greater than last year's, and is less than previous years', despite increased cycling. But because there was a cluster of deaths in one month, 1000 cyclists lay down in a "die in" protest because cycling is so dangerous. Safer than before - but newly dangerous, somehow.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...death-protests

Meanwhile, the number of pedestrian deaths is once again far higher than the number of cyclist deaths.

I went to the trouble of looking out for you the London data which does indeed show in absolute terms that more pedestrians die in London than cyclists. However as there are an order of magnitude more trips made on foot than by bike the probability of getting killed if you elect to ride rather than walk is about two and a half times higher. If you add in seriously injured then the risk of being killed or seriously injured per trip is about 7 times higher by bike. If you take all injuries then that figure rises further.

Re your "Safer than before" comment in your first paragraph above this is a quote from the London report I referenced:

However, pedal cyclist KSIs were 36 per cent above the 2005-09 average, having
increased by 22 per cent over the year

To me safety is not limited to just dying. Being seriously injured or even just injured going about my normal daily life is important to me.

As I said in the previous thread I am not expressing a view either way just trying to make sure whatever argument takes place here does so based on the actual data rather than supposition or speculation and that it be based on metrics that are relevent to people's actual or perceived notion of safety.

Graham.

On 12/10/2013 2:41 PM, Graham wrote:

As I said in the previous thread I am not expressing a view either way just trying to make sure whatever argument takes place here does so based on the actual data rather than supposition or speculation and that it be based on metrics that are relevent to people's actual or perceived notion of safety.

That's an admirable goal. Unfortunately, as we've seen in debates about
safety, helmets, etc., basing things on actual data is a big problem for
F$#%k because the data never supports his contentions.

Hence taking things out of context and basing contentions on irrelevant
metrics is an absolute necessity--it's not an option.

On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 5:51:33 PM UTC-5, sms wrote:
On 12/10/2013 2:41 PM, Graham wrote:

As I said in the previous thread I am not expressing a view either way just trying to make sure whatever argument takes place here does so based on the actual data rather than supposition or speculation and that it be based on metrics that are relevent to people's actual or perceived notion of safety.

That's an admirable goal. Unfortunately, as we've seen in debates about
safety, helmets, etc., basing things on actual data is a big problem for
F$#%k because the data never supports his contentions.

Hence taking things out of context and basing contentions on irrelevant
metrics is an absolute necessity--it's not an option.

My context on this issue is the same context as those doing the protests. What got them riled up was the death count in one month. Therefore I looked at death counts.

- Frank Krygowski

Duane writes:

On 12/10/2013 11:41 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
Jay Beattie writes:
It is not because it has gotten that much worse in the last 20
years (although I got passed by a bus this morning by literally
an inch at 45mph), but riders are much less "tough."

Some of the bus drivers around here like to honk as they pass a
cyclist, for no reason that I can see. If I ever get the
opportunity, I will ask one why they do it.

Maybe to let you know that they see you.

The other 99% of vehicles manage to pass safely without honking.
It's hard for a gigantic vehicle honking as it passes me to come
across as anything other than "get out of my way".