Non-Motor Bicycle Accidents (Survey for People Residing in USA)

Dear Bicyclists

I am a graduate student at Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville
working under Dr. Greg Luttrell.

I am working on non-motor bicycle accidents which constitute nearly
90% of bicycle crashes in United States. The study will come up with
the following results:

1. Frequent list of non-motor bicycle accidents.
2. Analyze different type of accidents and provide an explanation of
the range of events causing injury to the bicyclists.

I have prepared a questionnaire for this study. The questionnaires are
available in 3 formats Microsoft word, Adobe Acrobat, and Text on the
following website:

http://www.siue.edu/~vseelam/

The Adobe Acrobat and Text format can be saved by right clicking the
mouse on the link and selecting "save target as" option in the pop up
window.

I would be very grateful if you all can fill in the survey and e-mail
it back to me at or send it by land mail to my
professor's address Dr. Greg Luttrell, Civil Engineering, Campus Box
1800, SIUE, Edwardsville, IL 62026.

Thanking You

Sincerely
Vijaysimha N Seelam

I am working on non-motor bicycle accidents which constitute nearly
90% of bicycle crashes in United States. The study will come up with
the following results:

1. Frequent list of non-motor bicycle accidents.
2. Analyze different type of accidents and provide an explanation of
the range of events causing injury to the bicyclists.

Sounds like another attempt to justify removing us from the roads.
Phil Brown

Agree with Phil, what is this study for?
-tom

"Phil Brown" wrote in message
...

I am working on non-motor bicycle accidents which constitute nearly
90% of bicycle crashes in United States. The study will come up with
the following results:

1. Frequent list of non-motor bicycle accidents.
2. Analyze different type of accidents and provide an explanation of
the range of events causing injury to the bicyclists.

Sounds like another attempt to justify removing us from the roads.
Phil Brown

Here is part of the reply I received and my reply:

In a message dated 2/2/04 11:03:48 AM, writes:

This survey is for improving the conditions for bicyclists and not against
them
i.e. taking them away from the roads.
Our professor lately worked on a bike project for Illinois dept of
transportation on the follwoing project " Best Practices for Construction and
Maintenance of Bicycle Trails in Illinois" and this sutdy branched out
from it. If you see the questionnaire they are matters concerning to debris on
the
pavements, surface conditions of pavements and non-pavements etc.
Please feel free to fill in the questionnaire and help in improving the
bicyclists travel conditions.


Sorry, I don't agree. Bicycle trails are simply a stealth method of removing us
from the roads. These studies invariably show that the roads are too dangerous
for cycling and recommend removing cyclists to trails.
If you were really interested in improving the safety of cycling you world
instigate a study about the causes of motor vehicle/bicycle accisents with
recommendations for improving that problem.
But perhaps you simpoly need a study to justify the money your department gets
from the state. Either way it does cycling no good.
Single vehicle bicycle accidents are two types-I wasn't paying attention or I
hit something in the road. You can't do anything about the former and current
budget problems mean the roads aren't going to get any better so ir seems clear
that your study can have only one result-more seperated trails for bicycles-get
us off the roads.
Phil Brown

On 02 Feb 2004 19:57:19 GMT, unged (Phil Brown) may
have said:

If you were really interested in improving the safety of cycling you world
instigate a study about the causes of motor vehicle/bicycle accisents with
recommendations for improving that problem.

That problem is well understood. Too many US motor vehicle drivers
are inattentive, incautious, and in inadequate control of vehicles
that they often don't even need to be using. Given the current US
culture, there is no way to address this problem which the electorate
will condone at this time.

Single vehicle bicycle accidents are two types-I wasn't paying attention or I
hit something in the road. You can't do anything about the former and current
budget problems mean the roads aren't going to get any better so ir seems clear
that your study can have only one result-more seperated trails for bicycles-get
us off the roads.

Or a third; do something to help make the roads more bike-safe with
the existing vehicles and drivers. Such as make the dedicated bike
lanes at the sides of existing roads into 6 foot paths instead of the
40 inches that some of the ones in Houston now measure. Neither
prohibit bikes from nor mandatorily relegate them to using sidewalks
in non-downtown areas. Get the street sweepers to clear the gutters
on city streets, particularly where bike lanes are present, more than
once every 6 months. Don't put bike lanes on roads whose gutters have
a sharply canted surface unless the lane is wide enough to provide a
useful surface entirely outside the gutter. Redesign the storm drains
so that they aren't bike traps. Find a less bike-killing deck design
for drawbridges. Require that wrecker drivers have a broom, dustpan
and trash bags for removal of shattered glass from the road surface
and gutter (a provision which was at one time imposed in part of
Florida, but may have been dropped) when working a wreck. Require
that new street construction have adequate space in the right lane for
a car to safely pass a bike without having to change lanes. Require
that there *must* be a bike passage through all speed humps, and that
it should not be in a location where its usefulness is destroyed by
parked cars. And take those idiot Clear Channel disk jocks up to the
top of the Sears Tower and give them a lesson in the use of umbrellas
as emergency parachutes.

I doubt that any of the above suggestions have any more hope of
adoption than any measure that would reduce the idiot factor in the
powered vehicle driver pool.

OTOH, I would also like to see a particular dumbass engineer (the one
who spec'ed out one specific bike path) strapped to the back of a
tandem and ridden through what he designed sometime. Preferably at
rush hour. And let *him* fix the flats.

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Yes, I have a killfile. If I don't respond to something,
it's also possible that I'm busy.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

"Phil Brown" wrote in message
...
Sorry, I don't agree. Bicycle trails are simply a stealth method of
removing us
from the roads.

This sounds a little paranoid. Are there any examples of jurisdictions that
have banned bicycles from roads? I can't think of one example in Ontario,
controlled access highways being the exception. Additionally, he plainly
states that he's investigating path surfaces. I highly doubt he's setting
policy for the state. Having said that, I don't disagree that there is a
lot that can be done to improve road design for cyclists.

Scott..

"David Reuteler" wrote in message
...
well, 18 states (AL, CO, GA, KS, LA, MI, NE, NY, ND, OK, OR, PA, SC, UT,
VT,
VA, WV, WY **) have laws requiring cyclists to get off the road and use
adjacent sidepaths if they exist.

** CO, GA, MI, OK, OR, PA, UT, VT, VA only apply if there is a local
ordinance.

Interesting. That's really rather unfortunate. I take it back Phil.
Perhaps you're not as paranoid as I would think! How did these get passed?
What was the logic? I assume something along the lines of "cyclist safety".

Scott..

S. Anderson wrote:
: This sounds a little paranoid. Are there any examples of jurisdictions that
: have banned bicycles from roads?

well, 18 states (AL, CO, GA, KS, LA, MI, NE, NY, ND, OK, OR, PA, SC, UT, VT,
VA, WV, WY **) have laws requiring cyclists to get off the road and use
adjacent sidepaths if they exist.

** CO, GA, MI, OK, OR, PA, UT, VT, VA only apply if there is a local ordinance.

http://www.bicycledriving.com/trafficlaw.htm (see Mandatory Sidepath Use)
--
david reuteler

Interesting. That's really rather unfortunate. I take it back Phil.
Perhaps you're not as paranoid as I would think! How did these get passed?
What was the logic? I assume something along the lines of "cyclist safety".

That's OK, even paranoids have enemies. And yes, that's the logic and if the
road surface is dangerous they shouldn't be there. Here in Marin county they
tried about 30 years go to ban bikes along a road with a seperate bike path. We
fought it and won.
Phil Brown

S. Anderson wrote:
"Phil Brown" wrote in message news:20040202145719.16864.00000085@mb-
...
Sorry, I don't agree. Bicycle trails are simply a stealth method of
removing us
from the roads.
This sounds a little paranoid. Are there any examples of jurisdictions
that have banned bicycles from roads? I can't think of one example in
Ontario, controlled access highways being the exception. Additionally,
he plainly states that he's investigating path surfaces. I highly
doubt he's setting policy for the state. Having said that, I don't
disagree that there is a lot that can be done to improve road design
for cyclists.
Scott..


“Shanghai plans to ban bicycles from its major roads next year. . . t
make more room for cars

“Such measures aim to “control the number of bicycles on city streets,
it quoted police official Chen Yuangao

“police officials cited the need to control two-wheelers as the key t
reducing gridlock

Excerpts from From AP 12/09/03


-