|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
Zebee Johnstone Wrote: In aus.bicycle on Tue, 21 Aug 2007 06:13:43 +1000 EuanB wrote: No. Contray to popular belief the average speed for utility trips taken by bicycle is about the same as a utility trip taken by a car, or indeed quicker. It takes me 70 minutes to ride the thirty kilometers in to work, the best I've done in a car is fifty. 30km would be at the upper end for utility trips? I'd say that it's probably past the upper end, to be able to cycle 60kms every day you've gotta have a level of commitment beyond that of most people. I'm not saying that not everyone's capable, of course they are, but where's the motivation when you know nothing about riding a bike as means of transport? A 15km trip though, that can be done in half 45 minutes by all but the frail and desperately unfit. Regular cyclists can get that down to under 30 minutes with not too much trouble so it's much more attractive to the more casual cyclist. I don't mean this as some kind of snobbery, I just feel that that initial push to get someone on a bike instead of in a train or in a car is hard enough to achieve for people who's demographics suit cycling way more than driving. That initial push would be much harder where the it's more of a line ball call which, speaking for the south east suburbs, riding in from 30kms is in terms of journey time. If I had to guess I'd pin it on the higher speeds that traffic travels at in the UK. For any given type of the road the speed limit's are higher than in Australai. Is there a breakdown between urban and non? I suspect urban UK roads in most cities are narrower and more congested with cars and peds than those in most Oz cities. As I've said, I haven't really read much about it. I can confirm that all roads in the UK are narrower than their Australian counterparts and the speeds are generally higher. -- EuanB |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
Shane Stanley Wrote: In article , EuanB wrote: Surely the ratio per hour and the ratio per km would be different, no? No. Contray to popular belief the average speed for utility trips taken by bicycle is about the same as a utility trip taken by a car, or indeed quicker. But are the majority of cycling miles utility trips? I would have thought there'd be at least a ratio of something 2:3 between time and distance figures. I would say so. Most roadies get their miles in commuting to work and there are a lot of commuters who don't ride socially. Read the report. in the UK where you're ten times more likely to die Are there any theories to explain the big difference compared to here? Not that I'm aware of, although I haven't invested any time in to the matter. When I was riding in the UK cycling was just another way you got around and warranted no special consideration. If I had to guess I'd pin it on the higher speeds that traffic travels at in the UK. For any given type of the road the speed limit's are higher than in Australai. Does this suggest that attitude matters less than road conditions, or is the attitude to cyclists similar in England? When I was riding in the UK I didn't notice any particular hostility towards cyclists, but then Iwas a child or in my teens. Lurking on uk.rec.bicycle and uk.transport(?) suggests that there is some animosity out there, and then of course there's the ridiculous pieces by Jeremey Clarkson. -- EuanB |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
I'd say that it's probably past the upper end, to be able to cycle 60kms every day you've gotta have a level of commitment beyond that of most people. I'm not saying that not everyone's capable, of course they are, but where's the motivation when you know nothing about riding a bike as means of transport? Definitely. I thought 6km was big at first didn't help that going home was uphill! Then I was doing about 8-9km and reckoned I was a hero. The only way I thought a 20km trip was worth contemplating was because of the 'bent. A friend had one and was doing 25 or so each way and said it was way better lying down. So I decided that it was the only way to get the exercise and while expensive a bike you ride is always cheaper than one you don't. The first few rides around my suburb to get used to it scared the hell out of me Not because bents are weird but because hills are a *******. I knew I had a few so had to practice. The first few rides I was walking up most of them. The motivation was mostly "i've said I will so I will" and "I'll feel a poor fool if I give up now!" and "fitness is about working hard, so stop whinging about working hard". And of course "It's hard work, but I love riding this thing!" I dunno most people would be willing to spend a lot of dosh on a 'bent, but without it I wouldn't be cycling... How many people live 10km or 15km from work I wonder? Where I work a lot of people live 20 or so, and with no decent cycle network now the M2's history. Someone from St Ives wants to cycle but there's too much ugliness on the Mona vale Road for him. Zebee |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
Patrick Turner wrote:
Ask yourself what's the ratio of motorists to cyclists when you take a look at the passing traffic. I reckon maybe 0.5% of traffic is a cyclist. Iwanted real figures. I already know that more than 7% of all trips in Perth are done by bicycle, which doesn't quite gell with your 0.5% for wherever you are. I can wait 20 minutes on Northbourne Ave and see 2 guys go past on bicycles. How many hundred motorists? lots. And an occasional bus full of ppl. The cyclists probably don't ride as far as ppl drive, so the total bicycle kilometres travelled each day per annun in Oz probably is less than 0.5% of total motorvehicle distance travelled. But the ratio of dead cyclists to dead motorists isn't 1:200, 0r 0.5%, its allegedly about 1:20, or 5%. I guess this makes a bicycle 10 times more dangerous than being a motorist or being a passenger in a bus. You're making all this up on the spot, aren't you? Theo |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
Patrick Turner wrote:
Zebee Johnstone wrote: So the solution is to do what they did with drink-driving. massive education campaign coupled with some really serious enforcement of laws. A few high profile cases of *careless* drivers who hit cyclists being imprisoned, a story every week how someone who was driving poorly was arrested and fined and had to leave their car cos they were taken to the copshop. A story every couple of weeks about a cyclist who reported a bad driver and the driver was convicted and lost their licence. Would take 2-3 years to start to have an effect... I'd just love to see the politians get busy on the legislation changes and revisions and get funding grants going for the protection of cyclists by means of an education program. But politics works on the fickle nature of the public and on priorities and whether any votes are in it. Maybe you spend millions on campaigns and providing a secure new home for motoring murderers, and save 4 lives a year. So you think the effort isn't worth it. What's a few cyclists? Somehow I think the improvement and maintenance of a cycling infrastructure should be the priority. Did you know that most cyclist accidents do not involve another vehicle? Theo |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
Patrick Turner wrote:
But once you ride only on dedicated off road cycle paths, then the risk plummets, How so? The majority of cycle accidents don't involve another vehicle. Roadways are filled with very predictable motor vehicle traffic, not those wildly unpredictable pedestrians and dogs. If Oppie was a young fella of 25 now, would he be seen on the roads? Of course he would, what a silly question. I guess the expectancy is another silly statistical peice of BS because the expectancy of life falls as you mount a bike, and then rises when you get off. The exact opposite is true. The increase in life expectancy through improved health far outweighs the risks of riding. Theo |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
Shane Stanley wrote:
But are the majority of cycling miles utility trips? I would have thought there'd be at least a ratio of something 2:3 between time and distance figures. My old ride to work was the same for the car and the bike but only because I planned to arrive at 7am before the traffic got heavy. In the afternoon I left at five, same as everyone else, and even though it was all bloody well uphill, was 5-10 minutes quicker than the car over the twelve kms. Theo |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
On Aug 21, 11:16 am, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
Patrick Turner wrote: Zebee Johnstone wrote: So the solution is to do what they did with drink-driving. massive education campaign coupled with some really serious enforcement of laws. A few high profile cases of *careless* drivers who hit cyclists being imprisoned, a story every week how someone who was driving poorly was arrested and fined and had to leave their car cos they were taken to the copshop. A story every couple of weeks about a cyclist who reported a bad driver and the driver was convicted and lost their licence. Would take 2-3 years to start to have an effect... I'd just love to see the politians get busy on the legislation changes and revisions and get funding grants going for the protection of cyclists by means of an education program. But politics works on the fickle nature of the public and on priorities and whether any votes are in it. Maybe you spend millions on campaigns and providing a secure new home for motoring murderers, and save 4 lives a year. So you think the effort isn't worth it. What's a few cyclists? Somehow I think the improvement and maintenance of a cycling infrastructure should be the priority. Did you know that most cyclist accidents do not involve another vehicle? Theo- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Bit most fatal ones do involve another vehicle. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
"Zebee Johnstone" wrote in message ... I'd say that it's probably past the upper end, to be able to cycle 60kms every day you've gotta have a level of commitment beyond that of most people. I'm not saying that not everyone's capable, of course they are, but where's the motivation when you know nothing about riding a bike as means of transport? Definitely. I thought 6km was big at first didn't help that going home was uphill! Then I was doing about 8-9km and reckoned I was a hero. The only way I thought a 20km trip was worth contemplating was because of the 'bent. A friend had one and was doing 25 or so each way and said it was way better lying down. So I decided that it was the only way to get the exercise and while expensive a bike you ride is always cheaper than one you don't. The first few rides around my suburb to get used to it scared the hell out of me Not because bents are weird but because hills are a *******. I knew I had a few so had to practice. The first few rides I was walking up most of them. The motivation was mostly "i've said I will so I will" and "I'll feel a poor fool if I give up now!" and "fitness is about working hard, so stop whinging about working hard". And of course "It's hard work, but I love riding this thing!" I dunno most people would be willing to spend a lot of dosh on a 'bent, but without it I wouldn't be cycling... How many people live 10km or 15km from work I wonder? Where I work a lot of people live 20 or so, and with no decent cycle network now the M2's history. Someone from St Ives wants to cycle but there's too much ugliness on the Mona vale Road for him. Zebee I cycle 15km each way at the moment, but my last commute was nigh on 20km. I did it pretty easily and I'm a lazy fat boy. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
SA - Road safety program launched with a focus on cyclists
"Zebee Johnstone" wrote in message ... In aus.bicycle on Tue, 21 Aug 2007 06:13:43 +1000 EuanB wrote: No. Contray to popular belief the average speed for utility trips taken by bicycle is about the same as a utility trip taken by a car, or indeed quicker. It takes me 70 minutes to ride the thirty kilometers in to work, the best I've done in a car is fifty. 30km would be at the upper end for utility trips? At first I thought "OK for some" but then I realised that the fastest trip to work on the motorcycle is about 35 mins, the peak hour one is more like 45 (with lanesplitting) which compares better to the 70 by bicycle. Peak hour by car doesn't bear thinking about! If I had to guess I'd pin it on the higher speeds that traffic travels at in the UK. For any given type of the road the speed limit's are higher than in Australai. Is there a breakdown between urban and non? I suspect urban UK roads in most cities are narrower and more congested with cars and peds than those in most Oz cities. Zebee One place I used to work took: 7 minutes by bike 12 minutes running 30 minutes walking 30 minutes by car (assuming peak hour). Car had 12 traffic lights to destination and a couple of sneaky one way streets (probably could have been quicker if I did it more than a few times and found the quicker alleyways). All other trips crossed Pyrmont Bridge. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Club cyclists in safety video. | Simon Mason | UK | 4 | December 9th 06 02:53 PM |
CBR: Tuggeranong Vikings CC Novice Road Cycling Program | Bean Long | Australia | 4 | September 11th 06 01:33 AM |
Exercise Program for Cyclists | Jeff Starr | General | 35 | September 27th 05 07:13 AM |
The best way to improve safety for cyclists in a city... | Paul R | General | 264 | December 10th 04 11:01 PM |
The best way to improve safety for cyclists in a city... | Paul R | Social Issues | 43 | November 23rd 04 10:14 PM |