Helmets

MartinM said:

Better tell the Dutch who have the lowest helmet wearing rate and the
lowest cyclist head injury rate in the world.
and like Denmark an extensive cycle lane network

....which is much more dangerous than their roads.

Tony

"MartinM" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Better tell the Dutch who have the lowest helmet wearing rate and the
lowest cyclist head injury rate in the world.
and like Denmark an extensive cycle lane network

Oh no, one panacea replaced by another :-(

Pete

On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 15:20:19 +0100, Tony Raven <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

MartinM said:

Better tell the Dutch who have the lowest helmet wearing rate and the
lowest cyclist head injury rate in the world.
and like Denmark an extensive cycle lane network

...which is much more dangerous than their roads.

Is it? 'tis a few years since I've cycle in the Netherlands... well,
come to think of it, more than a few - more like 13. Anyway, the
cycle lanes seemed safe enough then. Much better than what we have
here. F'rinstance, when a cycle lane on a main road crossed a side
road, traffic on the side road had to (and did!) give way to cyclists.

The other big advantage to cyclepaths over there was that they
actually had signs to tell you where they went to.

Has it changed much since I was last there?

--
Andrew P

On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:50:53 +0100 someone who may be Naqerj
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Is it? 'tis a few years since I've cycle in the Netherlands... well,
come to think of it, more than a few - more like 13. Anyway, the
cycle lanes seemed safe enough then.

As with helmets, "common sense" is not a good guide to how safe
something is.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

Naqerj wrote

Quoted message said:

Is it? 'tis a few years since I've cycle in the Netherlands... well,
come to think of it, more than a few - more like 13. Anyway, the
cycle lanes seemed safe enough then. Much better than what we have
here. F'rinstance, when a cycle lane on a main road crossed a side
road, traffic on the side road had to (and did!) give way to cyclists.

The other big advantage to cyclepaths over there was that they
actually had signs to tell you where they went to.

Has it changed much since I was last there?

Wegman, Dijkstra. SWOV, Netherlands, 1992.
Originally presented to Roads and Traffic 2000 conference, Berlin, 1988;
Revised version included in Still more bikes behind the dikes, CROW, 1992.

In built-up areas cycle tracks 25% safer than unsegregated road between
junctions, but 32% more dangerous at junctions. Cycle lanes 36% more
dangerous between junctions, 19% safer at junctions. Seriousness of
accidents greater if tracks or lanes present compared with no
facilities. Cycle lanes narrower than 1.8m particularly hazardous.
Outside towns, cycle track safety depends on car and cycle numbers.
New cross-town routes in Den Haag and Tilburg had produced no safety
gain and had not encouraged much new cycling.

Bach, Rosbach, Joergensen. Vejdirekforatet, Denmark, 1988

Traffic safety of cycle tracks in Danish cities.
Before and after study of 105 new cycle paths in Denmark, introduced
1978-81, totalling 64km. Cyclist casualties increased 48% following
introduction of paths. Car drivers, moped riders and pedestrians also
suffered more accidents, with overall rise in casualties of 27%.

Tony

On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:41:25 +0100, Tony Raven <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Wegman, Dijkstra. SWOV, Netherlands, 1992.
Originally presented to Roads and Traffic 2000 conference, Berlin, 1988;
Revised version included in Still more bikes behind the dikes, CROW, 1992.

In built-up areas cycle tracks 25% safer than unsegregated road between
junctions, but 32% more dangerous at junctions. Cycle lanes 36% more
dangerous between junctions, 19% safer at junctions. Seriousness of
accidents greater if tracks or lanes present compared with no
facilities. Cycle lanes narrower than 1.8m particularly hazardous.
Outside towns, cycle track safety depends on car and cycle numbers.
New cross-town routes in Den Haag and Tilburg had produced no safety
gain and had not encouraged much new cycling.

Thanks.

That study would be from about the time I was there. Most of my
riding was rural so that would explain why it seemed safe enough to
be. As I said before, what impressed me most was the was traffic on
side roads would give way to cyclists on the path. There was one
occasion when a motorist didn't give way but this was - yes, you've
guessed it - a British-registered car.

I suppose that's partly where the danger comes from - as a British
cyclist I approached these junctions warily and was always pleasantly
sirprised when a car stopped for me. A Dutchman approaching the same
junction would probably be expecting the car to stop and then come
serious unstuck if it didn't.

--
Andrew P