@chdot Thread Drift is more my métier although obviously I would not be on here if I was not guilty of 1 through to 4.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
"Tram fall cyclists to sue ‘negligent’ council"
(247 posts)-
Posted 10 years ago #
-
Well, that was a fun thread to stroll through.
Anyone got a photo of the offending Haymarket bit I can borrow for the blog?
PS: thanks to SRD on page one for pointing out that I am not someone else...!
Posted 10 years ago # -
Screenshots from these any use?
Posted 10 years ago # -
I gave Kudos to @Wilmington's Cow and I meant it.
He admitted to coming off due to the tram tracks.
Nobody else on this thread has admitted to coming off due to the tram tracks.
If others did so and explained the events in say the 60 seconds prior to their off. We would then have the opportunity to learn from their experience. The only other evidence we have available are some videos.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Cheers chdot, they'll be grand.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@SRD
"Are equally experienced cyclists with good bike handling skills falling? or just weak, poorly skilled ones?" Good question afaik we don't know. IMHO it is a spectrum
I know I am an 'experienced' cyclist.
I have not stated that "the reason others have fallen is because they have poor skills."
I have multiple bikes. The one I use most is a racer with 28mm tyres (formerly 23mm)
I can bunny hop but do not bunny hop across the tram tracks.
Posted 10 years ago # -
OK Dangerous, I will bite.
First point, clearly this forum is a small subset of all edinburgh cyclists. Equally, not all cyclists on here use haymarket.
So, in your opinion, if that stretch of road didn't have tram tracks would there have been as many "offs"?
I think your answer will determine if (in your mind) the track design/placement or the rider ability is at fault here.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I have fallen off in icy conditions at the same corner of back street near Murrayfield in 2010 and 2011 (bought ice stud tyres after this but never used them much, just avoid back streets) also knocked off by kids running straight out between parked cars when trailing an empty tow along. Pointed out to the kids if they had done that and I was a car they'd be dead. Also knocked off going up the ramp off the canal towpath to WOL path by another cyclist coming down and he didn't even stop though he was partially responsible.
I have crossed at Haymarket in all directions at least once and not fallen off and I have gone down Haymarket yards twice (I await confirmation as to whether that constitutes Haymarket or a separate geographical location) the only bit of Haymarket that I will happily traverse is heading east and then taking left to Grosvenor hilton.
My main bug bear though is tactile pavings that have been laid in parallel with direction of travel. I find I take a skite most times I cross them above a crawl. So when safe to do so I will cross the mid line and rumble over the perpendicular paving stones.
Also meant to ask, @dangerous, do you own a small printing business near Haymarket, not I think actually at Haymarket but slightly further east in the direction of manor place?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Nope, haven't fallen on the tram tracks, use Haymarket Station section about once a week & Haymarket Yards daily. The worst I've had is a rear wheel shimmy which did not warrant any sort of correcting action on my part. On the other hand I have cycled over 80,000 miles on a push bike in the last 15 years as well as 150,000 miles as a motorbike courier before that which makes me unafraid of traffic . I also do a fair bit on mountain biking , so I am used to sketchy handling conditions.
The point is that even with all that, I still approach the Haymarket section with a good deal of circumspection, especially in the wet. The problem being that the optimum way through the tracks puts you in direct conflict with traffic trying to overtake (but we all know that). It is clearly entirely possible to ride these routes without falling off, but if someone of my experience has to take especial care to negotiate a piece of road, then quite clearly it isn't fit for purpose and it isn't surprising that other people have fallen. This is a piece of road which has been recently designed and executed and should have been constructed in such a way that anyone can use it. It hasn't been and that is why it is entirely the correct decision to sue the Council to make them change the road layout.Posted 10 years ago # -
"The tram tracks clearly make things less safe but they are only dangerous if you allow them to be."
"Where is your evidence that they are competent and experienced ?"
"IMHO it is not possible to be in total control and then fall on the tracks."
"I have not stated that "the reason others have fallen is because they have poor skills.""
Perhaps not 'stated' but heavily heavily implied in quite a few posts (and a number of other responses to people that could have been listed, though would have required all the context around them.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Nelly
I stated in my opening post:
"The tram tracks clearly make things less safe but they are only dangerous if you allow them to be."
Later I used "more dangerous" instead of "less safe" as that is IMHO more accurate.
IMHO if the tracks were not there nearly all of the incidents would not occur.
I believe that the tracks are a (very) significant factor but not the cause of the accidents.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@gembo
Thanks glad to see some humour on the forum.
I have no connection to said printing business or the EEN or Scotsman.
Posted 10 years ago # -
" I believe that the tracks are a (very) significant factor but not the cause of the accidents."
Interesting, so how does the causation work then? This is my account.
cyclists(Iv) -> old layout -> no more than usual falls (dv)
cyclists (Iv) -> new layout (intervening variable) -> higher than normal falls (dv)
Or should the layout be the DV? need to think about it when I'm not also trying to cook haggis and neeps
Could you explain your understanding if causation?
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Wilmington's Cow
Re my comment "Where is your evidence that they are competent and experienced ?"
I'll clarify this to make my meaning clearer. I am basically saying we don't know their experience / competence level and not that they are incompetent and or inexperienced.
I think your contribution has been useful to this thread. Can you share more details about your off. What have you done differently since then as it has not re-occurred ?
The cycling abilities of people who have come off is unknown.
Posted 10 years ago # -
People have fallen, it seems, for one of two reasons - either a wheel goes into the track or a wheel slides on the track. The cause of the fall then is whatever causes the wheel to go in the track or whatever causes the wheel to lose its grip. The angle of approach being too shallow seems like the primary cause.
But then we have to ask why the person has crossed the tracks at that unfortunate angle. Did they choose it or did they feel compelled to take the line they did? Probably some combination of the two. The riders skills are irrelevant. It should require no special skills to cycle on a city street and if the Council has created a situation of elevated risk where riders require a higher level of skill to negotiate its infrastructure then it is negligent, especially if it was warned in advance.
There was much discussion in the run-up to the streets re-opening suggesting that these types of accidents were inevitable because of the limited scope for cyclists to take the optimum line when they are surrounded by traffic. Even where people have erred and chosen the wrong line, there is a good argument that this sort of human error was entirely predictable. A different street layout was possible but the Council chose to continue with its plans and has done nothing to mitigate the risks it created either in anticipation of accidents or in response to them. It has left itself open to this kind of action and I hope the claims succeed.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I have never fallen on the tram tracks. I have also never cycled Haymarket westbound, even tho I live near the city centre. Done it eastbound several times.
So I am in the category of cyclists who have been displaced, as I actively avoid Haymarket westbound.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Topical Newsflash 8-)
Richard Hammond just fell off his bike on tram tracks on Top Gear.
NB I don't work for the BBC either
Posted 10 years ago # -
Google Luas bike accident and you will get a lot of stuff from Dublin tram track and bike exchanges. One of them in The Broadsheet makes the point For the last time it is not the bikes that are the problem.[*]
Did not see the Hammond spill. Did he take the track at too shallow an angle?
Posted 10 years ago # -
I was about to make the point that the experience / skill level of the riders at Haymarket is beside the point, but then I realised that actually it's significant for just the opposite reason that has been implied.
The only thing we can say with confidence about these riders is that they've hitherto been able to negotiate all other city centre junctions / hazards on their commutes without incident.
Many of them have, we can assume, been accident-free in rush hour Edinburgh for many years (at least, this applies to the people I could vouch for who've had such crashes).
That such a huge volume of incidents - possibly more than the whole of Edinburgh city centre put together - are suddenly taking place at this one junction to riders who (by evidence of their own bodies) are otherwise perfectly competent makes it quite difficult to accept that the blame lies with the victims.
Posted 10 years ago # -
The design of our streets should not punish a moment of less-than-perfect vehicle control.
If some feature requires higher than average skill to negotiate without serious injury, then there is clearly something wrong with that feature. UK streets must be safe for all users in all conditions, whether that's an "experienced cyclist" (whatever that means), an eight-year-old following their mum to school, or a pensioner slowly spinning to get the morning paper.
Accepting anything otherwise is to promote a brutal survival of the fittest where anyone who doesn't come up to your personal view on skill gets a trip to A&E.
However, if we really want to say that it's OK for mistakes to be punished with personal injury, let's go the whole hog. Rig up central reservations on motorways. Don't bother laying shellac on corners. Remove airbags and safety glass from cars. Strip out the safety systems on planes and trains. We'd certainly save a few quid.
Or we could continue to campaign for liveable streets which are safe for everyone to use, not just an athletic, experienced elite.
Abstract: "I'm alright Jack" used to blame victims really hacks me off.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Apropos of nothing, this topic does remind me of the recent robust debate over the pedestrian who was allegedly hit by a frothing Strava maniac at the Barnton golf alley.
I believe the killer blow in that topic was simply that you must ride in such a way that you can stop short of any hazard. It's obvious that a permanent tram line is significantly easier to anticipate than a pitch black pedestrian on an unlit path at midnight. I can't help but notice that some of the chief proponents of the pedestrian are not extending the tram line the same courtesy :P
Posted 10 years ago # -
Richard Hammond found himself in between tram tracks and then fell off trying to move left to be free from them on a russian one-way street.
The road appeared to be straight at the time.
Traffic was busy.
Don't know if real or staged.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Either way, evidently not in total control. Tut tut, and on telly too! He'll be getting us a bad name :)
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Dave
Do you have a link to "Frothing Strava maniac at the Barnton golf alley" thread.I am not aware of it.
Posted 10 years ago # -
And with that, Dave, I'll drop out. Same result, different deliberate antagonist taking extreme positions (and completely an utterly separate and unrelated, no matter how much they're made out to be the same situation, which you know of course).
Must stop stepping over bridges, there be trolls.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Wilmington's Cow
I value your contribution to this thread. I asked you a couple of questions could you please share ?
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Dangerous
Why do you value WC's contribution so much? Your questions seem designed to establish what people who have fallen might have done to bring about their own accident. Do you have an interest in the action against the Council?Posted 10 years ago # -
Think WC is away, he may come back, he has before. Believe dave's rhetorical devices may have been the last straw.
In a Popperian sense dangerous may have to try falling off to disprove his theory now. I think that is going a bit too far in pursuit of science though.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Instography
This was my request to @Wilmington's Cow
"I think your contribution has been useful to this thread. Can you share more details about your off. What have you done differently since then as it has not re-occurred ?"
I think he is the only person on this thread (forum ?) to admit to having come off due to the Tram tracks
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Insto. You are a genius. This thread makes perfect sense to me now ;-)
Posted 10 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
