"
Team Sky (@TeamSky)
09/11/2012 18:46
Bradley Wiggins is making good progress after his crash & has released this statement thanking fans for their support -
"
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
"Wiggins (and now Sutton) in hospital after crash"
(88 posts)-
Posted 12 years ago #
-
From the Team Sky link above
" “Shane [Sutton] is making steady progress but is likely to remain in hospital for one more day under observation.“He has fractured his cheekbone which will require surgery in due course. He, like Bradley, is expected to make a complete recovery and will be back in work shortly.”"
which is good news as initial reports of his injuries made them sound rather serious. There's not a lot of detail around about his accident, though, I wonder why?
Posted 12 years ago # -
This guest blog about cycling in Glasgow on the POp website's been wellreceived: http://pedalonparliament.org/a-momentary-wiggins/
Posted 12 years ago # -
This guest blog about cycling in Glasgow
Well I recognise the road names but not the problem.
Renfield St/Union St/Jamaica St is all one way. Pick whatever lane you're going to need at the other end and roll with it. When the motor traffic stops, which it does a lot, go to the front.
If you get in the wrong lane on Union St then you have to turn right under the bridge. That can make it a pest to get back the right way again without a wee bit of cheating since there are restrictions on turns.
The motor traffic never moves fast down there.
I've never had a car growl at me.
Castle St northbound has a design flaw in that the right lane can turn left into Glebe St so you need to be in the right lane to go straight on. I can't think of anything else that bothers me.
I'm happy to go for a ride with the author to see the issues. I'm sometimes in Gorbals on Sunday afternoon or I'm available during school holidays. I'm not big on poetry and have been known to annoy people who do like it.
Posted 12 years ago # -
Checked the Googles.
There is a one block bus/bike contraflow lane on Jamaica St. at the old Classic Grand so it's not quite all one way. However you can't easily get into the way of the contra flow lane as that lane in Union St turns west under the Hielanman's Umbrella.
I can only see one place where you might ride into a barrier but that's only if you were in the lane for turning into Oxford St. and decided to not to.
Posted 12 years ago # -
"
APPCG (@allpartycycling)
11/11/2012 14:26
"Bradley Wiggins: there but for the grace of God go all cyclists" | by @nzerem from Channel 4 http://blogs.channel4.com/keme-nzerem-on-sport/bradley-wiggins-there-but-for-the-grace-of-god-go-all-cyclists/269"
Posted 12 years ago # -
"
Shane Sutton hits out at 'death trap' roads as pursuit squads fall short"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/nov/16/shane-sutton-death-trap-roads
Posted 12 years ago # -
Congratulation to Chris Boardman saying on TV that in terms of road safety, cycle helmets are a complete Red Herring. We need a change in the road environment and not body armour. Cycle helmets are an irrelevant distraction from the real issue of making the roads safer, probably why the motor industry is so keen on them...
Posted 12 years ago # -
Kim, agree entirely - afraid sutton-helmets wont help.
Sportives and charity rides often make helmets mandatory (for insurance presumably and hence dreamed up by an actuary). I am interested in what valid stats these actuarial calcs come from - its baffling.
Posted 12 years ago # -
Here's an example of how the whole language of reporting motor accidents is biased toward not blaming the motorist, but instead blaming something or someone else...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-20377778
"Man injured by falling traffic light in Aberdeen crash"
Actually the traffic light did not fall over of its own accord. Neither did the car crash of its own accord. What actually happened was that the driver was not careful enough (and possibly incompetent) and crashed the car into a fixed object, causing injury to a pedestrian.
Posted 12 years ago # -
..and now Cavendish...
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4652191/mark-cavendish-injured-in-crash.html
Although this time it appears to have been the riders fault.
Posted 12 years ago # -
There's an interesting article on cycle safety on country roads on BBC breakfast today (seen at about 7.20). Quite good on the whole but I feel they missed the opportunity to influence driver behaviour, focussing more on infrastructure. I wish the media would grasp the nettle and broadcast the truth that bad driving is immoral.
Posted 12 years ago # -
I wish the media would grasp the nettle and broadcast the truth that bad driving is immoral.
Oh, but that would be unpopular. It would also mean they'd have to question their own behaviour (or remain hypocrites). Who's going to do that if they don't have to?
Posted 12 years ago # -
In the piece it was pointed out that the accident rate on country roads is higher than in town, given the lower number of cyclists. Can anyone confirm that this is a robust conclusion?
There were two cases quoted, Brad Wiggins and a female interviewed who was paralysed. The latter made the case that it was poor driving that caused the incident - the driver was never caught. I don't expect to see Wiggo practicing on cycle lanes in the near future. So I found it disappointing that the conclusion of the article seemed to be on the need for more infrastructure rather than the need for better driving. I agree that more infraesture in the country would be valuable but I also think that politicians and media should make a big effort to prick driver consciences.
Posted 12 years ago # -
What sort of infrastructure in the country are they talking about?
Short of Dutch-style paths (basically cyclepaths of the same quality and in many cases the same width of roads) I don't know how much use they'd be. I guess paths along the side of particularly nasty high-speed roads would be welcome, but they'd need to be of adequate quality (and suitably maintained and kept free of leaf litter) to let me ride along them at 20mph if they wanted me to use them for any great distance.
Posted 12 years ago # -
The thing that really helps is redesigning the roads to guide drivers naturally towards driving slowly and carefully wherever necessary. Our current roads encourage fast driving. They also encourage conflict, with cars/buses/lorries being shoved into the same road space as bicycles, for instance at junctions.
Good cycle paths are wide, smooth and continuous enough to suit any style of cycling.Posted 12 years ago # -
I'm not sure of the need for more infrastructure (in Edinburgh), we have a relatively good shared path network as it is. I would support say a 15mph limit on those types of paths, and concentrate more on driver (and cyclist) awareness, and enforcement where necessary.
We already have an extensive network of good quality (mostly) infrastructure for fast moving vehicles, which I would say is for bicycles going at 20mph or more too.
The emphasis always seems to be removing cyclists from danger rather than dealing with the actual problem, which is bad driving. Bad driving kills a hell of a lot more drivers, than it does pedestrians or cyclists.
So once we have succeeded in separating cyclists from the bad drivers, do we build even more infrastructure that only the good drivers can use to protect them?Posted 12 years ago # -
"Our current roads encourage fast driving", and "traffic flow" of course.
Yesterday's announcement that roadworks were being suspended because 'motorists don't like them' shows how backward thinking is.
Things have probably moved on a bit since 'assets' like the Potterrow race track were planned (with 40mph banked corner) and built.
There was a plan to remove this (and the underpass) but I'm sure there's no money for that.
Posted 12 years ago # -
I'm late to this as I've been busy at work but the report that the driver, who was in the incident with Wiggins, being charged really annoys me. We have members on here who have had equally serious injuries in incidents of this type, but the police here appear to just shrug their shoulders. One rule for the famous as usual. My grip isn't with Wiggo but as his case gets different treatment he's defo gone down in my estimation. Has be been outspoken in complaining that he appear to have received preferencial treatment over other 'commuter' cyclists in similar incidents?
Posted 12 years ago # -
"We already have an extensive network of good quality (mostly) infrastructure for fast moving vehicles, which I would say is for bicycles going at 20mph or more too."
Well, yes, but.
That's exactly why a lot of people won't consider attempting to ride bikes.
It would be nice to think that education and enforcement would work wonders. The experience from the Continent is that segregated infrastructure gets people cycling and modifies driver behaviour.
I'm not in the 'segregation everywhere' camp. There's a good case in places like Leith Walk - there IS room. It would encourage more cycling and increase the chance that most vehicles would stay below 20mph.
Of course 'speed limits' and 'reducing parking' are 'not popular' - according to politicians who imagine that 'normal people' are motorists (and vice versa) - and obviously the only people who vote...
ADDED
The norm for almost all city roads should be 20mph. It should be harder for cars to get 'everywhere' easily. There should be more road closures with proper 'permeability' cut-throughs and much better provision for pedestrians - not merely as a consequence of 'making things better for cycling'.
Lesley Hinds was supposed to be 'keen on pedestrians' - but not much evidence in practice.
Posted 12 years ago # -
@Baldcyclist So once we have succeeded in separating cyclists from the bad drivers, do we build even more infrastructure that only the good drivers can use to protect them?
I think you'll find that all drivers (and their passengers) have been increasingly protected from the bad ones for many years - mostly through both road and vehicle engineering and technology [1], and much less through driver education...
It's back to the health & safety hierarchy of control:
Notice how far down behaviour and PPE fall - they simply are poor options in safety critical systems due to human fallibility.
Eliminating bad driving requires making it impossible/unlikely to cause injury, and administration (enforcement) and behavioural changes should only be considered if elimination isn't possible.
Eliminate (Teleworking? Essential travel only?) > Substitution (Public transport) > Engineering (Segregation) > Administration (enforcement) > Behaviour (education) > PPE (unmentionables)
Not entirely convinced about the entries above, but from a H&S viewpoint, this hierarchy is well established and supported.
Robert
[1] Yes, my wife has a Volvo!Posted 12 years ago # -
PPE?
Posted 12 years ago # -
I think that there is an element of truth in the H & S pic but it perhaps is oversimplistic.
I would (repeat) support infrastructure for cyclists but, for example, I can't see *good* projects being set up soon for example, the popular runs along the East Lothian coast road (more likely) or the run through the Moorfoots. Priority perhaps would be better placed on commuting routes anyway?
However I do believe that there is an opportunity to modify driver behaviour around cyclists, especially following the olympics/TdF and the dfact that numbers are increasing. I also think that the vast majority of motorists are reasonably benevolent (though not all!!) but that many of them are just unaware what they need to do with respect to cyclists. This makes me think that it is worthwhile pushing the education line hard.
Posted 12 years ago # -
@steveo - PPE?
I suspect you're trying to tempt me into mentioning the unmentionables, but the abbreviation stands for Personal Protective Equipment, so just extrapolate into a cycling context...
;-)
Robert
Posted 12 years ago # -
Notice how far down behaviour and PPE fall - they simply are poor options in safety critical systems due to human fallibility.
And yet when applied to cycling, it is suddenly right at the top!
Interesting..
Posted 12 years ago # -
And yet when applied to cycling, it is suddenly right at the top!
Presumably because the controls further up the hierarchy have been variously dismissed by "the powers that be" as too expensive, too difficult, or too 'unpopular'?
Posted 12 years ago # -
"
The thing that changed it all round was the accident in November. I was out late training because I had to do a day in London — a media day — then I was supposed to be on The Graham Norton show and Never Mind the Buzzcocks. And I crashed. It was a bit of a blessing in disguise. I thought – right, let’s get back to training now. I had a week off after the accident then I came out here for a week’s training. That was it. I just got the hunger back for it. It was a dramatic way to put a stop to it all, but it worked.”
"
Posted 12 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
