tintin123 Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Maybe they should find out how Amsterdam deals with it. There are lots of tram tracks and everybody uses bicycles. What is their accident rate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mort Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 The bickering , name calling and other assorted childishness can cease now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jezzyjj Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 Maybe they should find out how Amsterdam deals with it. There are lots of tram tracks and everybody uses bicycles. What is their accident rate?There appears to be very little info on this from anywhere, which is in part why this survey is being done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkleyIan Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Nottingham University did a significant amount of research about cyclist / light railway systems in the early 2000s. See if I can dig it out. Trouble is we have two lines of interest, one is integration of cycling with light rail (which supertram have flatly refused to do), and the other area is cyclists safety and the tram infrastructure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resident Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 (edited) I have cycled in areas with tramlines. I genuinely don't see how it is the fault of the tracks themselves. Yes you can classify them as a hazard, but they are a STATIC hazard, ie it's up to the operator of the moving vehicle to make adjustments in order to avoid them. I don't ride on tram tracks, I ride next to them. If I need to make a course correction I make sure that my wheels will cross the rail at an angle in which they will not 'slot in' to the groove. If it's wet then I take greater care where the tracks are concerned. If people find areas like the one mentioned above, Hillsborough corner. In those instances, if you feel it's too much of a hazard to ride across, just dismount, cross it and then remount and carry on. COMMON SENSE! Any accidents on tram-tracks, which involve no other than the cyclist and the track is PURELY rider error. My bold sentence is all that needs to be reported back. Edited July 25, 2014 by Resident Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cycleracer Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 I have cycled in areas with tramlines. I genuinely don't see how it is the fault of the tracks themselves. Yes you can classify them as a hazard, but they are a STATIC hazard, ie it's up to the operator of the moving vehicle to make adjustments in order to avoid them. I don't ride on tram tracks, I ride next to them. If I need to make a course correction I make sure that my wheels will cross the rail at an angle in which they will not 'slot in' to the groove. If it's wet then I take greater care where the tracks are concerned. If people find areas like the one mentioned above, Hillsborough corner. In those instances, if you feel it's too much of a hazard to ride across, just dismount, cross it and then remount and carry on. COMMON SENSE! Any accidents on tram-tracks, which involve no other than the cyclist and the track is PURELY rider error. My bold sentence is all that needs to be reported back. What your forgeting is that cyclists were using the roads a lot safer before the tracks were layed so the danger has been put in there. To a degree I can see your point of view but would you say the same about potholes or road humps that infuirate motorists because it knackers the suspension on there cars. It isn't the motorists fault its the highway departments and cyclists shouldn't have to face this danger on a daily basis as I do. The ones at Malin bridge were the road crosses the tramline is extremely dangerous usually with inpatient drivers at the back of you. Nothing is going to remove them and cyclists have to continue to do an assault course around them but in 2014 something has to be done to make our fantastic sport safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squiggs Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 I find the biggest risk areas are when the tracks pass the raised sections for passengers to get on and off. you only have at most five inches between the track and the side of the platform. and to make it worse the motorists don't give you much room when they overtake you between the platforms and the refuge islands.:mad: That's precisely why I do have some favour for signage (driver and rider education) indicating that cyclists should be in the centre of the lane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jezzyjj Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 I have cycled in areas with tramlines. I genuinely don't see how it is the fault of the tracks themselves. Yes you can classify them as a hazard, but they are a STATIC hazard, ie it's up to the operator of the moving vehicle to make adjustments in order to avoid them. I don't ride on tram tracks, I ride next to them. If I need to make a course correction I make sure that my wheels will cross the rail at an angle in which they will not 'slot in' to the groove. If it's wet then I take greater care where the tracks are concerned. If people find areas like the one mentioned above, Hillsborough corner. In those instances, if you feel it's too much of a hazard to ride across, just dismount, cross it and then remount and carry on. COMMON SENSE! Any accidents on tram-tracks, which involve no other than the cyclist and the track is PURELY rider error. My bold sentence is all that needs to be reported back. In the world you live in where the sun always shines and it never rains, a world without cars or other vehicles preventing you from riding how you would like to, accidents with tram tracks would be much less likely. However back in the world we live in..... I've never had an issue with tramlines myself, but I ride mountain bikes with fatter tyres and know how to hop across tracks if I can't go at an angle. But I wouldn't presume to say that they are not a hazard, because they certainly are. A greasy spot on the road is a static hazard, but I've been taken down by one of them. Things do not have to be moving to cause an issue. Static does not equal safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaffa1 Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 I have cycled in areas with tramlines. I genuinely don't see how it is the fault of the tracks themselves. Yes you can classify them as a hazard, but they are a STATIC hazard, ie it's up to the operator of the moving vehicle to make adjustments in order to avoid them. I don't ride on tram tracks, I ride next to them. If I need to make a course correction I make sure that my wheels will cross the rail at an angle in which they will not 'slot in' to the groove. If it's wet then I take greater care where the tracks are concerned. If people find areas like the one mentioned above, Hillsborough corner. In those instances, if you feel it's too much of a hazard to ride across, just dismount, cross it and then remount and carry on. COMMON SENSE! Any accidents on tram-tracks, which involve no other than the cyclist and the track is PURELY rider error. My bold sentence is all that needs to be reported back. Best answer yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkleyIan Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 http://www.mackssolicitors.co.uk/compensation-claims/road-traffic-accident/supertram-traffic-accident-compensation-battle-continues.html A motorist, who suffered brain damage after his car went out of control on wet Supertram tracks, has won the latest round in his battle for compensation William Roeof Norton Avenue, Sheffield, has so far only received an interim payment of £200,000, after he was seriously injured in 1995 on the Supertram tracks in Sheffield city centre. Mr Roe’s brain injuries meant he was left with no recollection of the accident but an eye witness saw him lose control of his Ford Sierra and collide with one of the pylons that carry power to the trams. Since the accident Mr Roe has needed full time care which has been provided by his wife. The Court of Appeal has now agreed that he can sue Sheffield city council as well as Supertrams builders and operators and it is hoped that Mr Roe’s total compensation could exceed £1 million Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now