Guest sibon Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 Cyclists disobeying stop signal or wearing dark clothing at night rarely cited in collisions causing serious injury. ROSPA don't agree. And they do know a bit about accidents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 A couple of weeks ago I drove up behind a cyclist on the A61, the section between Hall Wood Rd and Bracken Hill, at just after 4 pm, as it was getting dark, but not yet fully dark. I saw him later than I expected, which was a more than a little un-nerving. As a result, I had to brake harder than I'd have liked. In fact, if I had seen him earlier I probably wouldn't have needed to brake at all, just coasted to a lower speed until it was OK to overtake. He was dressed in dark clothing, and I first saw his outline against the trees beyond him. It wasn't until I got a lot closer to him that I saw his rear light. Once I saw the light it didn't seem particularly dim, but it was clearly not up to the job. He was probably thinking he was as safe as houses as he had a rear light. I think it was that as it wasn't totally dark, the light wasn't bright enough to be effective. Had it been fully dark I'd have seen him earlier, as there'd have been a bigger contrast between the light and the background. The whole episode got me thinking, so I've had a review of my own bike lights. My rear light is a pretty bog standard led type (in fact I regularly run 3 of them, one fixed and two flashing). However, I've now decided to go for a half watt unit. However, even though I do want to be seen, there is much more to cycle safety. The TRL report (see Guardian link in earlier posts) is very important as it clearly shows the major cause of adult cycle injuries/death are motorists. Lights, helmets, red light jumping etc are a minor side issue, and detract from the real problem. In concentrating on the cyclists' behaviour, a lot of newspaper articles, posts in forums etc seem to be blaming the victim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 ROSPA don't agree. And they do know a bit about accidents. Um. that link mentions neither dark clothing nor lights. You did read your own link? In fact ROSPA concur, they handily list the main causes of accidents, and dark clothes and lighting don't feature. At all. The main causes of cyclist accidents are stupid driver behaviour. Here's the top three countdown: 1/ Sideswiping a cyclist at a junction (overtaking, then IMMEDIATELY turning across the cyclist's path 2/ Overtaking too close 3/ Dooring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 The TRL report (see Guardian link in earlier posts) is very important as it clearly shows the major cause of adult cycle injuries/death are motorists. Lights, helmets, red light jumping etc are a minor side issue, and detract from the real problem. In concentrating on the cyclists' behaviour, a lot of newspaper articles, posts in forums etc seem to be blaming the victim. Precisely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 If I were still cycling I would wear one of those hi-viz reflective waistcoats at all times. They cost next to nothing - they weigh next to nothing and ought to be made compulsory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 If I were still cycling I would wear one of those hi-viz reflective waistcoats at all times. They cost next to nothing - they weigh next to nothing and ought to be made compulsory. My front lights are visible from 3 kilometers away. Drivers still pull out in front of me. Poor bike lights or reflective clothing have very little to do with cycling/vehicle accidents. Usually, it's the idiot driver at fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 Um. that link mentions neither dark clothing nor lights. . Here you go. The relevant bit, cut and pasted, with the key word highlighted. As a wise man once said "Do I have to draw you a diagram?" Protecting Cyclists A wide variety of measures can help to reduce the risk to cyclists. Cycle Route Networks Speed Management Schemes Improved Driver Awareness and Training Cyclist Training Conspicuity for Cyclists Cycle Helmets Bloody Wiki generation, no attention to detail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 Here you go. The relevant bit, cut and pasted, with the key word highlighted. As a wise man once said "Do I have to draw you a diagram?" Bloody Wiki generation, no attention to detail. You said ROSPA disagree that cyclists with poor lighting feature in a low percentage of accidents. Your link says nothing of the kind. Here's what ROSPA have said on the question of accidents: A much used statistic in Road Safety in that driver error is a factor in 95% of road accidents, whether by failing to notice a hazard, not reacting in time, or simply adopting a dangerous behaviour. http://www.rospa.co.uk/roadsafety/advice/motorvehicles/policy/preventaccidents.htm Apology accepted, please don't misuse sources and claim they say things they don't. The apportioning of blame varies from study to study, but not one study has ever found that the cyclists' behaviour was a major factor in RTAs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 Ah no, I said this. I'd suggest that in addition to that, there is an incentive for a pedestrian/ cyclist to behave in a manner that minimises the risk of a collision with a motorised vehicle. That may, or may not involve lights, bright clothing and a modicum of road sense. Ipod removal might also be a plan when crossing roads. Which you interpteted as this. None of the things you mention is a major factor in cyclist collisions. Many more accidents, and deaths, would be avoided if drivers didn't behave stupidly: http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study Risky cycling rarely to blame for bike accidents, study finds Cyclists disobeying stop signal or wearing dark clothing at night rarely cited in collisions causing serious injury. Maybe my subsequent reply wasn't clear enough. However, I stand by my original point which is that cyclists and pedestrians are stupid if they ride around, or walk around in the dark, in dark clothing and don't pay careful attention to their surroundings. If you read my link carefully, you will see that Rospa attribute the lower number of accidents at night to the lower number of cyclists on the road. If you really believe that it is ok to cycle around surrounded by an invisibility cloak, cutting lights and generally behaving badly on the highway, then fine, but please don't blame my driving for the poor judgement of other road users. Eater Sundae's post above is an excellent one. You should remove your blinkers and read it carefully... including the bits that you might find difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted December 20, 2009 Share Posted December 20, 2009 ROSPA don't agree. And they do know a bit about accidents. Can you show me where ROSPA cite visibility as a major factor in accidents? thought not. They offer advice, the Guardian link reports TFLs actual findings that flatly contradict your claim. The visibility of cyclists is a tiny proportion of the accidents that occur. "If you really believe that it is ok to cycle around surrounded by an invisibility cloak, cutting lights and generally behaving badly on the highway, then fine," Nothing I've said bears any relation to this load of old gubbins. Best argue with what's been said, not your hysterical inventions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.