http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: No Responsibilities Towards Cyclists en Sun, 31 May 2026 21:42:24 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198&page=2#post-68211 Tue, 01 May 2012 16:31:47 +0000 Min 68211@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Dave - I did, see the first paragraph!</p> <p>Claggy - that was me, sorry that wasn't clear. I didn't want to bung up the forum. They did post the full link again. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198&page=2#post-68204 Tue, 01 May 2012 15:18:30 +0000 Claggy Cog 68204@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Min, can I just ask, was it you that removed the video link or your colleague, as it is not clear from the message. If it was them, then I would suggest that they need to resend it with the link. Most users will have deleted the earlier message if they did not think it applied to them either that or if their inbox fills up then the earlier message will have been lost in the morass of mail. Just saying... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198&page=2#post-68203 Tue, 01 May 2012 15:14:39 +0000 Dave 68203@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Excellent. Now of course, you'll want to follow up to that congratulating them on taking such a positive line on road safety ;-) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198&page=2#post-68163 Tue, 01 May 2012 13:03:46 +0000 steveo 68163@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Excellent. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198&page=2#post-68141 Tue, 01 May 2012 12:10:33 +0000 Min 68141@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>A happy resolution to this, my colleague did get my point and so this was in the latest email. I replied to say it was great and thank you. :-)</p> <p><em>Cycle Safety: Following on from an article in the last edition, regarding safety for cyclists, a<br /> request has been made for me to draw attention also to<br /> <a href="http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/drivers-at-fault-in-majority-of-cycling-accidents-28489/" rel="nofollow">http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/drivers-at-fault-in-majority-of-cycling-accidents-28489/</a><br /> Very clearly road safety is a matter for all road users, not only cyclists (and, to that end, just in case<br /> road users other than cyclists missed seeing the video last time around, here it is again -<br /> <strong>(link removed as I don't want to embed the video again)</strong> and I very much<br /> recommend that it be viewed by drivers of motor vehicles as well as cyclists).</em> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-67015 Wed, 25 Apr 2012 11:05:24 +0000 Min 67015@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>"A recent study* pointed to drivers being responsible in 70% of collisions with adult cyclists"</em></p> <p>Found it!</p> <p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study" rel="nofollow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study</a></p> <p>The Guardian article posted by <a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6276">Crowriver</a> pointed to it. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66368 Fri, 20 Apr 2012 17:08:49 +0000 Min 66368@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I haven't heard anything more since yesterday but I have put my point across and that is the main thing! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66259 Fri, 20 Apr 2012 08:50:59 +0000 Dave 66259@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"why cyclists often veer abruptly off course and into the path of following vehicles"</p> <p>This whole statement is fundamentally wrong. I'm not sure quite how to articulate it, but I can easily rephrase it as follows:</p> <p>"Poor understanding and lack of awareness by drivers is why they often fail to anticipate cyclists' routine negotiation of obstacles in the road, such as parked cars and potholes. This lack of understanding may even extend to thinking that the cyclist is somehow "veering" into their "path", when in law, it is their responsibility to hold back and overtake only when safe to do so, taking into account the conditions ahead."</p> <p>You can quote me as an advanced driver and expert cyclist if you wish ;-) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66245 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 22:25:45 +0000 Uberuce 66245@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Amir: <em> Perhaps they need to be sent on maths courses.</em></p> <p>If I was Emperor, people wouldn't be allowed, depending on the level of scalding misanthropy I was at on the hour of being asked, to serve in public office, vote, or be allowed out the house or on the internet until they'd passed a basic science course. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66238 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 21:51:06 +0000 Min 66238@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>That is what I think too, it was not my intention to wind him up I was just trying to make a point but you never know what sort of mood people are in to begin with. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66234 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 21:35:01 +0000 gembo 66234@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>min your correspondent perhaps thought he was doing a good thing for cyclists. when you correctly pointed out the flaws in his approach he twisted your words in a fashion suggesting he was a bit miffed (also suggesting your reply was only one to point out the flaws - I wonder if that is true). Given his ( he is a he?) response I would be interested to see if when he calms down he is able to see where he went wrong. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66159 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 14:35:30 +0000 Min 66159@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Tom - No I don't think so though it is still very useful for my wee one-woman campaign, thanks! I think this one had to do with actual accident statistics, the Daily Mail twist made it out to be cyclists 50% of the time (which still shows drivers to be at fault 50% of the time also) but that is only if you include children in the stats. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66151 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 14:04:39 +0000 Tom 66151@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>'Min, is <a href="http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/drivers-at-fault-in-majority-of-cycling-accidents-28489/">this article</a> about the same report as the one you remember? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66150 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:59:01 +0000 minus six 66150@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Min, your correspondent is dim-witted. </p> <p>Not worth the angst! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66149 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:53:23 +0000 Min 66149@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Lol, you are just encouraging me! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66147 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:48:21 +0000 chdot 66147@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"why cyclists often veer abruptly off course and into the path of following vehicles"</p> <p>Think it's called legitimately occupying road space. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66146 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:46:01 +0000 Roibeard 66146@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@wingpig - I understand swept path (I think that's a mechanical or general engineering rather than specific railway term), but didn't realise it was an envelope on two wheels!</p> <p>"Footprint" might be an alternative, but perhaps too imprecise...</p> <p>Robert </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66143 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:40:36 +0000 amir 66143@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"point/time loci"</p> <p>I am not sure that some motorists understand space and time - especially when space is &gt;1d. Perhaps they need to be sent on maths courses. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66139 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:33:48 +0000 Min 66139@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>A draft - too fighty? I can't seem to tone it down. I quoted Wingpig verbatim, thanks WP!</p> <p><em>"Thank you for your reply. I am sure that cyclists do appreciate seeing the video and I am not sure why you seem to think I did not since I have already described it as "very excellent". Yes the video itself does focus on drivers, a shame then that drivers in the UoE will not see it since you did not ask them to watch it.</p> <p>I did not say that raising safety awareness within the cycling community is pointless, I said that raising it *only* among cyclists without including drivers is pointless and I stick by that. Despite cyclists (and pedestrians) being those most at risk of injury in any collision with ANY motor vehicle, it is the driver's responsibility to drive their vehicle responsibly. As cyclists are most at risk of injury in a collision with a motor vehicle, it can be safely assumed that they would wish to not undergo such a collision. As drivers are the ones wielding the deadlier weapon (from a partially-protected position within it), they have a responsibility to ALL OTHER ROAD USERS to mitigate the risk they and their vehicle present. A recent study* pointed to drivers being responsible in 70% of collisions with adult cyclists - this is another reason why it is important to include drivers in any safety campaign involving cyclists.<br /> "</em></p> <p>*Although I can't seem to find it. I even remember the Daily Mail twisting it and us having a discussion about it but I can't find that either! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66138 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:29:39 +0000 crowriver 66138@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yeah, I can forsee the legislation enshrining the safety of cyclists in law: the Active Safety Boundary Order (ASBO). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66136 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:26:27 +0000 Arellcat 66136@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>What's a good less mathsy word for "envelope"...?</em></p> <p>In railway terminology I think it's known as the 'swept path', which comprises the kinematic envelope plus the safety margin. For cyclists and motorbikes it tends to be referred to as the 'dynamic envelope'.</p> <p>Active Safety Boundary might be more appropriate and understandable. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66127 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:09:47 +0000 chdot 66127@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<br /> <strong>Why space matters</strong></p> <p>Freedom, fitness, fun. Cycling promises so much, yet each year thousands of people are put off by fear of traffic.</p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://3feetplease.org.uk" rel="nofollow">http://3feetplease.org.uk</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66125 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:07:32 +0000 wingpig 66125@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Ideally, all point/time loci within the envelope of the overtaking vehicle would not intersect with those of the envelope of the cyclist being overtaken, including those in the half-car-width-wiggle/wobble-space either side of the narrower set comprising the cyclist's footprint at any moment. The problem is that cyclists are treated as very small stationary objects rather than moving objects which might move laterally as well as forwards. Drivers not only underestimate their vehicle's width but also the length, especially when it comes to cutting back in after barging past. Where envelopes are concerned, intersections elicit injuries. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66117 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 12:57:25 +0000 amir 66117@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Wiggle-room? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66107 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 12:36:47 +0000 wingpig 66107@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><blockquote><em>"why cyclists often veer abruptly off course and into the path of following vehicles"</em></blockquote></p> <p>Technically, in a stream of traffic, you're always in the path of the following vehicle. It's when you have to abruptly move into the path a following vehicle has selected as a shoulder-skimming route to becoming the following vehicle of the vehicle the cyclist is following that there's a problem.</p> <p>What's a good less mathsy word for "envelope" for referring to the envelope of a vehicle performing an overtaking manoeuvre (or the envelope of a left-turning HGV and so on) to people who have forgotten their GCSE maths? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66098 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 12:10:18 +0000 wingpig 66098@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Despite cyclists being those most at risk of injury in any collision with ANY motor vehicle, it is the driver's responsibility to drive their vehicle responsibly. As cyclists are most at risk of injury in a collision with a motor vehicle, it can be safely assumed that they would wish to not undergo such a collision. As drivers are the ones wielding the deadlier weapon (from a partially-protected position within it), they have a responsibility to ALL OTHER ROAD USERS to mitigate the risk they and their vehicle present." </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66096 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 12:08:19 +0000 Min 66096@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yes, some sort of passive/aggressive approach might be best since I am NOT wrong and both the original and the reply definitely focus only on cyclists! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66094 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 12:07:40 +0000 Instography 66094@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>If he'd sent it to all road users on the basis that in a collision the cyclist will always come off worst that would have been fine. There would be shared responsibility for avoiding collisions. The intention is laudable but the way it's been done has weakened its impact because seeing it aimed at cyclists, why would a driver watch it? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66093 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 12:03:27 +0000 chdot 66093@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Something like -</p> <p>"</p> <p>Thanks for replying.</p> <p>I got the impression (wrongly perhaps) that you were only suggesting that cyclists should watch video.</p> <p>I think ALL road users should - including pedestrians!</p> <p>" </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6198#post-66091 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 11:59:51 +0000 Min 66091@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I just copied in the text, it must have had some sort of formatting already I guess.</p> <p>I need help here - this was my reply, I think I made it pretty clear that I only believe drivers should be included as well and I am not trying to make out cyclists don't need to bother.</p> <p><em>"I am very disappointed to see you exempting drivers from having any responsibility towards cycle safety by exhorting only cyclists to watch the very excellent training video from Lothian Buses. Lothian Buses have a great reputation amongst Edinburgh cyclists for the very reason that they are trained well and take responsibility for cyclists safety instead of putting the onus entirely on the cyclists to get out of the way. As well as cyclists, a great many drivers could learn a lot from that video as all of the issues raised -for example - by bus drivers partially overtaking and immediately turning left are also created by private car drivers too. No amount of video watching by myself or other cyclists (yourself included I believe?)is going to stop them doing that. Any promotion on cycle safety MUST include drivers too otherwise it is pointless."</em></p> <p>This was the reply I got, my blood is boiling right now, particularly at the bits in bold so any suggestions as to how to reply would be welcome.</p> <p><em>The reason why I focussed on cyclists in the accompanying text (which I did at the very particular request of a cyclist within our community) was because, in the event of a collision between a motor vehicle and a bicycle, it's always the cyclist who will come off worst. I'm very conscious of the number of people cycling to and from LF, and I thought that they'd appreciate seeing the video (in fact all other comments received so far, apart from yours, seem to bear that out). <strong>I'd noted that the video most certainly did focus on drivers responsibilities,</strong>* and it does not seem to me in any way to exempt divers from anything at all. <strong>I'm actually very surprised that you think that raising safety awareness amongst the cycling community is pointless. </strong>Incidentally I agree with your estimation of the diligence of most bus drivers, but there are always to exceptions to the rule, and it's good to see that Lothian buses have supported this initiative.</em></p> <p>*yeah but you have not told any drivers to watch it. </p>