How would you improve central London Cycling?

[Ming the Merciless]

That said, I will bite. If we are thinking of banning hands-fee use to reduce risk, then we should also ban talking period. In fact any utterances could prove distracting.

Passengers are aware of when to talk and when not too. The passenger is aware of how much the driver is needing to concentrate or soon will. The person on the end of the phone is not.

This thread is about improving central London cycling. Banning the use of hands free phones is one such practical step.

 

[vickster]

Certainly should ban children from cars then, extremely distracting if shouting, having a paddy, fighting, crying. Young uns as passengers likely have no idea when to talk or not, about how much concentration is needed...if in the back seat they won't have a clear view of the road in front either

@Etern4l are you a member of LCC, maybe get in touch with them / your local group if not and interested in London cycling advocacy

 

[mjr]

Certainly should ban children from cars then, extremely distracting if shouting, having a paddy, fighting, crying. Young uns as passengers likely have no idea when to talk or not, about how much concentration is needed...if in the back seat they won't have a clear view of the road in front either

There is actually a lot of criticism of parents of "the backseat generation" who are taxiing their children around by car, creating a perception of the world as a series of disconnected islands that they are transported between in the backseat. The more extreme critics say it is pretty much child abuse if you could use public transport, cargo bikes or strollers because you don't have time to engage with children while driving and are much more likely to shout or speak sharply to them to make them shut up.

More children riding in cargo bikes and the infrastructure and policing to support it would be a big improvement for cycling anywhere, including central London.

 

[ianrauk]

Lots of vans parked in cycle/bus lanes today, but my biggest gripe with cycling in London is the massive amount of waiting at traffic lights, often for no reason.

It adds a fair amount of time to the cycle commute

 

[Dogtrousers]

Not convinced? Are you a driver yourself?

Yes I'm a driver myself and I NEVER use a mobile phone when driving. If I have a passenger they deal with the phones. If driving alone, I switch the phone OFF (Not silent, not vibrating, not handsfree ... OFF)

The idea that you can use a phone while driving without any "material distraction" does not convince me one bit.

 

[mjr]

Yes, I'm seriously suggesting the vast majority of UK drivers are rational and responsible. The proof is in the pudding: were this false it would have been a total carnage out there, yet the UK is one of the safest countries in the world in terms of road accident rates, despite virtually non-existent police presence (OK, the automated policing via safety cameras and CCTV might play a role to be fair!).

It doesn't really matter that the vast majority are fine. It only takes one of the bad ones to injure people (or worse) and phoney drivers are a big enough minority (moronity?) to be a problem worth tackling.

And then without me even looking for it, this near-miss appears on my feed:

View: https://twitter.com/phonekills/status/1491526464520560641


Do you reckon the vast majority of phoney drivers can be trusted to look around properly before moving? I think it's far more likely they'll miss the green light or queue starting to move, get honked at, panic and drive off without looking, possibly into a more vulnerable road user.

 

[Richard Fairhurst]

A parked vehicle is more of a danger than a moving one whose driver is distracted (he doesn't just report on stationary phone usage) ?

Egan Bernal might say so...

 

[Etern4l]

IThat nicked side mirror might have just hit a cyclist as it demonstrates the driver has poor perception of the width of their vehicle.

On its own it demonstrates nothing. The driver might have performed a manoeuvre to avoid hitting a child who ran onto the road.

Granted, not the best example though. Should have just mentioned all the claims due to theft and crimnal damage.

Yes I'm a driver myself and I NEVER use a mobile phone when driving. If I have a passenger they deal with the phones. If driving alone, I switch the phone OFF (Not silent, not vibrating, not handsfree ... OFF)

The idea that you can use a phone while driving without any "material distraction" does not convince me one bit.

Any activity not directly related to driving the vehicle is distracting, including:
* Operating a car stereo / sound system - the preventive action would be to ban such devices from vehicles
* Observation of architecture and attractive pedestrians immaterial to ongoing operation and routing of the vehicle - somewhat tricky to enforce, but close-distance helmet camera footage should enable successful prosecution in some cases
* Distracting activities such as rubbing one's forehead, tapping, singing - the relevant ban would be accompanied by enforcement by mandatory onboard CCTV and stimulant therapy aimed at improving driver's focus
* Any observation of or interaction with passengers - only Squid Game-style sedated passengers would be permitted into vehicles, ideally confined in dedicated closed containers (resembling, but not to be confused with coffins)

Etc. The list of safety improvements goes on. Obviously banning all human-operated vehicles including accident-prone bicycles would go a long way towards reduction of road accidents.

In the more immediate reality what we would want to do is make data-driven decisions, which is why I asked for research regarding the impact of stationary phone use, and so far received an unrelated study, and an ancedote showing a person using her phone while the vehicle was in motion.

Being data-driven would help with prioritisation and effective use of the extremely limited law enforcement resources. It's possible that some police personnel are very happy to sit at the desk dealing with the box-ticking effort of processing open-shut cases of recorded smartphone use, but is this the best use of police time in presence of soaring serious crime, as well as grave driving offences and road safety issues?

 

[mjr]

Being data-driven would help with prioritisation and effective use of the extremely limited law enforcement resources. It's possible that some police personnel are very happy to sit at the desk dealing with the box-ticking effort of processing open-shut cases of recorded smartphone use, but is this the best use of police time in presence of soaring serious crime, as well as grave driving offences and road safety issues?

Better use of police time than ticketing cyclists who scoot past red lights!</cheap-shot>

 

[Etern4l]

Better use of police time than ticketing cyclists who scoot past red lights!</cheap-shot>

Indeed, I would rate that higher too, however, one problem is that the police would become absolutely inundated with those cases if they were to strictly prosecute (based on my observation!).

We could joyfully continue arguing the toss which issues are higher priority, but instead we should just examine the data which hopefully the police have available, at least in some partial form. Out of all the serious road accidents (involving injury), what percentage is associated with the activities or factors of potential concern, e. g cyclist knocked over by a passing vehicle while attempting to manoeuvre around a car stopped on the cycling lane, or: a sober driver put the phone away, then moved his car forward and actually hit a pedestrian (wonder how often that actually happens). Ideally, the data would also indicate any other confounding factors such as presence of other passengers, radio/music on, or even distracting pedestrians!

 

[Fab Foodie]

I like riding in traffic. It's enormous fun and a mental challenge too. Bike lanes have too many people trying to prove something. No thanks.

This^^^

 

[Etern4l]

This^^^

While, as a libertarian, I would be tempted to argue for the right of the individual to challenge themselves intellectually in this manner (although would encourage them to pursue deeper mental activities and review their ideas of fun), there is no doubt that clearly segregated bike lanes are - or largely would be - massively safer and more efficient for all road users. As a driver, I'm much slower and extra careful around cyclists, particularly around the rate ones that seem like they are in it for the sake of fun and mental challenge.

 

[Oldhippy]

Once again, refer to Peter Walker, Bike Nation.

 

[Etern4l]

Thanks, apologies if I missed your earlier recommendation of that. Regardless of the contents though, I am obviously all for a bike nation, but I do want cars as far away from me as possible during my cycle commute. I don't need this to be a mental challenge, I don't find constant car collision avoidance fun since I have no trouble predicting what could go wrong. I want this to be safe and simple - the fact that it is not surely is a major deterrent for potential cyclists. Green cycleways would be perfect, if not for out of control thugs/gangbangers in absence of any police to speak of in this country (certainly London).

 

[Ming the Merciless]

On its own it demonstrates nothing. The driver might have performed a manoeuvre to avoid hitting a child who ran onto the road.

Granted, not the best example though. Should have just mentioned all the claims due to theft and crimnal

Your example demonstrates they were going too fast for conditions, they weren’t being responsible, the weren’t situationally aware. In fact if they were being responsible they likely wouldn’t even be in their car as their short journey didn’t warrant it. Why on earth you are defending all these accidents caused by people who were driving when they didn’t need to I don’t know. If you want to improve cycling in central London, you want to reduce the millions of short journeys they are making by car.