tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8919432872771641105.post8076828795164448731..comments2012-02-14T09:47:59.224+00:00Comments on MCRcycling: Pedestrian danger from cars versus cyclesDr C.http://www.blogger.com/profile/10234078254243840589noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8919432872771641105.post-10011706143671618232011-12-02T12:11:43.707+00:002011-12-02T12:11:43.707+00:00The other thing to mention is that I think a bicyc...The other thing to mention is that I think a bicycle can generally turn and dodge to avoid a collision much quicker than a car. Also the fact that the cyclist will be hurt as well in a collision with a pedestrian also creates a built-in deterrent to avoid collisions in the first place.<br /><br />Great blog by the way.Smut Pedallerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05939627997312788346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8919432872771641105.post-58457923621931596872011-08-16T20:00:30.801+01:002011-08-16T20:00:30.801+01:00Re:'cyclists are exposed to fewer distractions...Re:'cyclists are exposed to fewer distractions on a bike than motorists are in a car' <br /><br />I have seen a woman on the motorway brushing her hair with both hands, while driving on the motorway. A man engrossed in texting, while driving on the motorway. <br /><br />----<br /><br />As far as I can tell, no cyclist has ever been seen using two mobile phones while travelling at 70 mph.<br /><br />http://croydoncyclist.wordpress.com/2011/08/16/driving-with-two-mobile-phones/amoebahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15783694650121687459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8919432872771641105.post-48490749497157685482011-08-06T16:12:01.553+01:002011-08-06T16:12:01.553+01:00@crapbournemouthcyclist,
I did consider adding re...@crapbournemouthcyclist,<br /><br />I did consider adding reaction distances based on an average person's reaction time. I also considered the issue of stopping time, but things quickly become very complicated. Whilst there are certain standards in place for vehicle braking, there is considerable variation. This holds particularly true with bikes; many bikes have excellent braking (particularly bikes owned by enthusiasts), but there is a huge amount of variation between different brake types and configurations. Add into the mix the current trend for brakeless fixies and it starts to get very difficult to add onto a diagram such as this. One thing I will say on the matter is that the ability of bikes to swerve to avoid danger (both due to their small width and hugely increased manoeuvrability compared to a car) would make people on bikes less of a threat to pedestrians.Dr C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10234078254243840589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8919432872771641105.post-58799222461500994362011-08-05T10:27:38.504+01:002011-08-05T10:27:38.504+01:00Great, makes much more sense now! Thanks for clari...Great, makes much more sense now! Thanks for clarifying.Timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08004517359661478638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8919432872771641105.post-15764877945409764742011-08-05T08:48:41.584+01:002011-08-05T08:48:41.584+01:00Mr C, you neglect to incorporate braking and more ...Mr C, you neglect to incorporate braking and more importantly, reaction distances.<br />Bringing one's attention back to the road and spotting a hazard ahead, first one has to react, then brake. Therefore, the increase in total distance is a squared multiple of the increased speed.<br />An example, a car at 30mph suddenly faces a hazard - the driver reacts, brakes and stops just short of the hazard. The same car starting at 37 mph would still be travelling at 22 mph when they struck the hazard! The forces on a pedestrian being struck at 22 mph are the same as falling onto concrete from the roof of a 2 storey house.<br />If you incorporated braking and reaction into your diagram, I fear you wouldn't have room on the page for it.crapbournemouthcyclisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07040362064777634431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8919432872771641105.post-41452814830603829992011-08-04T15:48:49.374+01:002011-08-04T15:48:49.374+01:00@Tim,
The diagram was fine, just the numbers were...@Tim,<br /><br />The diagram was fine, just the numbers were off (cycle numbers were speed in m/s, rather than distance covered in three seconds). Fixed it now, thanks for pointing it out.Dr C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10234078254243840589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8919432872771641105.post-74599784128505812432011-08-04T15:37:19.654+01:002011-08-04T15:37:19.654+01:00Errmm, you seem to be saying that a car travelling...Errmm, you seem to be saying that a car travelling at 30 mph will travel 40 meters in 3 seconds, but a bike (and presumably a car, a helicoptor, or a hovercraft for that matter) travelling at 20 mph will travel 8.8 meters in the same three second period? Or have I misread?<br /><br />I'm interested in how you've calculated this as it sounds like it's pretty obviously wrong - something going approximately a third faster than something else is going to travel about a third further than the other thing for any given period. I make the 20 mph object will travel means a mile every three minutes, so 1600m/180 seconds x3 = 26.6 meters travelled in a three second distraction period.<br /><br />Sorry, don't mean to nitpick, as the basic point (things going slower are less dangerous than things going faster) is entirely sound - it's just your figures don't make any sense to me.Timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08004517359661478638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8919432872771641105.post-76888151862889125492011-08-04T14:56:28.444+01:002011-08-04T14:56:28.444+01:00The other piece of evidence is that in an average ...The other piece of evidence is that in an average year two or less pedestrians are killed by motorists, whereas 80 pedestrians are killed by motorists driving on the pavements, and there are the pedestrians are killed by motorists as they try to cross the roads...<br /><br />Maybe this is why 20% of the population don't say they take walks of 20 minutes, less than once a year or never. Also, that in 2010 20% all trips less than one mile (1.6 KM) in length were made by car. <br /><br />So maybe this is why Government minsters keep telling us that they can not introduce any policy that which would restrict car use as "many people rely on their cars". All of which is a problem when we desperately need to "<a href="http://www.kimharding.net/blog/?p=1687" rel="nofollow">say no to ridiculous car trips</a>, and use active travel instead...Kimhttp://kimharding.net/blog/?cat=9noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8919432872771641105.post-39831350761164859872011-08-04T14:12:20.499+01:002011-08-04T14:12:20.499+01:00It also always amazed me that while people feel th...It also always amazed me that while people feel there's a need for segregating cycles from pedestrians for safety of the latter an idea of separating cars from cycles isn't as popular.ndruhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15324118775089929952noreply@blogger.com