as thats been proven to be absolutely useless time and time again.
What, wearing of helmets…it’s a must as tarmac is rather hard as you well know 
have to disagree with you on that one. There are those that argue that statistically there is no benefit.
I have managed to split a helmet into 2 pieces, through contact with a drivers window, and I’m blooming glad I had it on. Helmet or head after all.
I think the training itself is a very good thing for explaining dangers to inexperienced cyclists but a lot of the people you need to change their attitude would never attend unless it was compulsory (and the logistics of that make it a non-starter as far as I can see).
Plus, it only works if they continue to follow the training - look at all the cars, scooters, bikes, trucks etc on the road, many of who have done multiple driving tests, it doesn’t stop them driving like knobs. I seem to remember ‘mirror, signal, manouevre’ being a big part of my lessons when i was 17 but it’s the exception rather than the rule on the roads of south london.
The logic of segregated routes is that it’s a collective measure’ removes the need for training so it works for anybody on a given bit of tarmac - no need for the individuals involved to be trained/experienced (and it protects them from the actions of others). It’s the same sort of heirarchy of controls we use on site to stop people getting hurt - if you can put up a handrail to stop someone approaching an edge then you don’t beed to train them in harness use, rescue etc. (Can you tell I’ve just come back from a site managers H&S course 
)
The trouble with current cycling infrastructure, as someone pointed out above is that it’s so badly thought through that it actually puts people in harms way and gives them the impression of being safe, often the blue stripe is the worst place you can possibly be on a bike. I’d rather see one proper cycle route than 17 strips of blue paint down main roads.
The best solution to this and so many other road safety problems IMO is to get police out on the roads - pull over drivers who swing out without indicating, cyclists who jump red lights and any other reckless tosser on the road. You could even send them all on driver/rider improvement courses to target the compulsory training where it’s mosty required, or for more minor infractions, explain why what they did was stupid. The governement don’t seem so keen on that though - they’d rather paint some lines, throw some speed cameras around and let everyone sort themselves out.
Following on from Niteowls posts about HGV visibilty, these HGV awareness sessions are run every now and again - well worth attending to experience just how restricted the view is out of one of those things http://www.betterbankside.co.uk/events/20th-november-lorries-for-savvy-cyclists
Helmets time and time again have proven to be of little use I wear one but thats my personal choice.
When in Australia I got tickets for riding on a cycle path in a national park with no helmet…what a joke. As one report says …pedestrians have much more head injuries but no one advocates madatory helmets once you leave your house!
http://ipa.org.au/publications/2019/australia’s-helmet-law-disaster
I seem to remember some research that found drivers give helmet wearing cyclists less room than their unhelmetted companions - thus making it potentially more dangerous :ermm:
I wear a helmet pretty much all the time on my bike having smashed a few helmets doing silly things on mountain bikes as a youth that would have resulted in a very sore head. Not sure it would be much use if a bus drove over my head though. I think they’re tested for a 2m drop at 10mph or something so not much defense against the average family car.
I believe as well we are going through a quick period of a surge in cycling and on both sides the various users of the road dont know how to deal with it.
I have just come back from a weekend in Holland and you can see the way they drive they are constantly thinking about cyclists (because everyone who drives also cycles) The infrastructure is also top notch with their own traffic lights, ability to turn right on red lights (would be left in UK) segregated lanes at dangerous intersections etc. Training in school as kids.
With more and more people cycling there will be a critical point at which other vehicles will have to adjust their driving to suit and also the infrastructure will have to change. Along with this increased training in schools and enforcement of traffic laws for cyclists.
(cycling helmets)
i think its the most misunderstood use of an helmet, since its main purpose was originally meant to improve aerodynamics rather than anything else. the design has improved along the years, but if you guys want to compare the use of an arai on a bike racer and a pusbike helmet on a pushbike racer its a totally different cattle of fish. the pushbike helmet was never designed to resist an impact on a collision against another vehicle, but only to protect in case of an accident by racers falling over.
(end of cycling helmets paragraph)
monkimark, the state dont have resources to have more policing on the roads, the forces are already stretched as they are.
what wouldnt be a bad idea is to make a public safety campaing on national television, as they did for our bikes.
I realise that there is great competition for budgets but imo, preventing needless deaths on the roads (pedestrians, cyclists, bikers, cars etc) is a pretty good way to spend your cash. Especially since you generate revenue through fines as you do it.
“The logic of segregated routes is that it’s a collective measure’ removes the need for training so it works for anybody on a given bit of tarmac - no need for the individuals involved to be trained/experienced (and it protects them from the actions of others)”
Monkimark - this is the exact opposite of what I was saying. As Silver6 said - there isnt the finances nor resources to segregate cyclists on EVERY piece of road. There IS a boom in cycling and given the individual health benefits (not to mention the reduction in costs to the NHS in the long term), I would applaude its encouragement. However, there is never going to be a system wherby car/lorries/buses and cyclists do not mix.
Ive driven around Holland. They have the space to provide wide cycle routes with clear signage for all. Central London does not.
To encourage more bikes onto the road, without providing training on how to deal with large vehicles, is madness imho.
As Ive said, the cycling groups need to stop pointing the blame at other road users and look at themselves to educate and nurture the less experienced riders first.
If and only then, are accidents still occuring, can they then justify to everyone else, the need for further improvements.
I was a cyclist in London for 20 years and had 2 big offs. One on ice, one due to a pothole.
Edit - sorry 3. I once hit a french kid in Greenwich park. However I was bombing it down the hill doing 30mph and he looked the wrong way. That one was kinda worth it though 
I have to disagree with this Amsterddam and Rotterdam have the same lack of space as does central London and in fact in many areas the streeets are even more narrow and share them with trams as well. They just think them out properley. Netherlands is one of the most denseley populated countries in the world but actually tackles the problems with well thought out policies not blue paint on a road.
In other sad news a sixth cyclist has died …and thsi quote from TFL
Critics argue that statistics from the Department for Transport and Transport for London (TfL), among others, show that lawbreaking by cyclists is very rarely to blame for serious accidents. TfL figures showed cyclists breaking the law was identified as a factor in just 6% of cases where a rider was killed or badly hurt.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/18/sixth-london-cyclist-killed-camberwell-lorry
I havent driven through Amsterdam, so cant comment on that specific city however…
“TfL figures showed cyclists breaking the law was identified as a factor in just 6% of cases where a rider was killed or badly hurt”
Is it illegal to wear dark clothing, go up the inside of a lorry and sit in his blind spot?
(Police to cyclists) “They told me if I knew cyclists were being killed (‘yes’) & that I should wear hi vis & a helmet. Transferring blame to riders,”
Ooh what a surprise! Cyclists should take responsibility for their own safety! :w00t:
You can read all you want statistics but when I landed after high speed jump on my shoulder/head, I was very happy I’ve been wearing helmet, gloves and some other bits and bobs. This happened in forest but could as easily be street. And tarmac or what ever you are going to land on, is not only hard but also abrasive, so as for me it’s better helmet than my hair/skin. Most helmets are not for aerodynamics, yes they are made to be more aero dynamical but not for this purpose. What aero you got in forest doing 10-15mph? 
Its made to protect your head, end of discussion. And expensive helmets do their job, and high end ones are made from carbon.
As for the cyclist’s, main problem is awareness (female or male). Not knowing the hazards of going inside while vehicle is turning (they just don’t expect that, it is not like they are suicidal). Another thing is changing their position on the road without checking behind. It’s like they expect whatever happens other vehicle to suddenly stop or disappear. I don’t mind cyclist going in any lane in slow moving traffic as long as they check sides before they manoeuvre.
“Another thing is changing their position on the road without checking behind. It’s like they expect whatever happens other vehicle to suddenly stop or disappear”
Ive lost count of the number of times mate. Had a classic a few months back going along Jamaica rd. Parked car, central reservation, (so I had nowhere to go) cyclist with headphones on. She’s doing 5mph completely oblivious to everything around her. I tooted her 3 times to make her aware of my presence, as I came up behind her. She just swung out like she was on a sunday ride in the country ffs.
:pinch:
The lack of a lifesaver by cyclists is rife…I was on my bicycle the other day when another cyclist did this to me…so I had a quick shout. We reached the lights together and he said I was in the wrong because he was ahead of me and so had right of way???
But to be fair the amount of time people change lanes in their cars or turn right without looking
Fair play for reprimanding him.
You should read the whole sentence, you might have understood the point.
Try reading all this, I will keep it short.
No point spending £10m on safety aspects if cyclists ignore it and do illegal things.
So the 6th cyclist fatality today was at the Camberwell Rd/Albany Rd junction. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-24989985
Leon Daniels, managing director for surface transport at Transport for London, said: "Our deepest sympathies go out to the family and friends of the male cyclist who tragically died after a collision with an HGV which was turning left at the Camberwell Road junction with Albany Street.
Green Party London Assembly Member Jenny Jones tweeted: “6 cyclists dead in 14 days - stop blaming victims & fix the big problems. Get HGVs off roads at rush hour.”
If I was a betting man, I’d have quite a bit of money on it that the HGV was sitting at the junction first and the cyclist came up his nearside as the lights changed, so I’m dubious about Jenny Jones’s statement blaming HGVs… again! We’re all having a sensible debate about these cyclist deaths and suggesting ways of improving things, but to be blunt about it (and not wanting to offend anyone), there are far too many idiots on bicycles who, whilst not doing anything illegal, are putting themselves directly in harms way and unfortunately some end up dead.
Danny Williams, a cycling blogger who also sits on the Mayor’s Roads Task Force, said: “People have moved from being sort of starting to get angry to getting incredibly angry and now they are scared.”
Well if people perhaps directed some of their anger at the idiots amongst their fellow cyclists then it might have more of an effect on safety than looking to blame everyone else with their ‘Woe is us’ victim mentality.
At lot has been said about banning hgvs during rush too. This latest fatality happened during the day.
A long time ago, when I used to cycle everywhere, I avoided using main roads wherever possible. I cycled from Lands to John O’Groats the long way and only needed to use a few miles of dual carriageway. If I were to cycle in London again (and that seems highly unlikely as my wife has threatened to divorce me if I do) I would be steering well clear of anything called a ‘superhighway’, even if it was populated only by other bicycles. Rather than encouraging more cyclists onto these superhighways maybe it would be better policy if cyclists were re-directed more to the 20mph speed-humped backstreets?