- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
London cyclists (CC licensed by Ambernectar 13:Flickr)TfL aims to save dozens of lives in London with new innovative safety trials
Innovative trials and new design standards will improve cycle safety and save dozens of lives across London, according to Transport for London (TfL).
The organisation has completely revised its Cycle Safety Action Plan to include new technology to improve the safety of HGVs and buses, which which is promised to include making bicycles more easily visible and vehicle braking systems more responsive - and a plan to double the number of adult cyclists taking advanced skills training.
TfL has also outlines multimillion pound infrastructure redesigns, making use of public consultation and best practice.
The fully updated London Cycling Design Standards, have been published for public consultation today.
TfL states as one of its top priorities to reduce by 40 per cent the number of people killed or seriously injured on London's roads by 2020.
Last year 132 people, included 65 pedestrians and 14 cyclists, were killed on London roads.
The Mayor, Boris Johnson, and TfL pledged action to prioritise the safety of the most vulnerable road users: pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists, including 32 new proposals on top of the last Cycle Safety Action Plan published in 2010, including:
- Helping to reduce HGV traffic during peak hours by trialling innovative quiet vehicle technology to help expand off-peak delivery. This would remove conflicts between cyclists and lorries during morning and evening rush hours.
- Working with manufacturers to develop better designs for side guards in order to further prevent fatal and serious injuries, as well as delivering the Safer Lorry Scheme this year.
- Carrying out trials of detection equipment on London buses to help drivers be more aware of pedestrians and cyclists near their vehicles, which if successful could be rolled out across London's bus fleet. TfL will also look to trial Intelligent Speed Adaptation (ISA), which would monitor and potentially restrict the top speed of buses.
- Working with the automotive industry to explore how improvements to car design could further protect cyclists, such as Autonomous Emergency Braking Systems, which could help make vehicles stop more quickly, and the introduction of a EuroNCAP safety rating system for cyclists so that car buyers can assess the cycle safety credentials of any new vehicle.
- Working with cycle manufacturers to improve how easy it is to see bicycles by building lights or retro-reflective equipment into bike frames.
- Continuing to develop and deliver the Safer Urban Driving CPC course to help put more than 10,000 freight and fleet drivers a year through essential safety training.
- Doubling the number of adult cyclists receiving advanced skills training by creating a dedicated London Virtual Skills Hub. This will allow online booking of cycle training and advanced safety skills across London to attract more commuter cyclists to take up training.
Andrew Gilligan, The Mayor’s Cycling Commissioner said: “The Mayor is spending hundreds of millions of pounds on better bike infrastructure to cater for the vast growth in cycling on London’s roads.
“This document aims to see that those projects are delivered to higher standards. We do not expect perfection, and the best must not be the enemy of the good. But as the Mayor has said, everything we pay for must be done at least adequately, or not at all.
“At the same time, we know that TfL and City Hall have no monopoly of wisdom. The standards will be consulted on before they become final by the end of the year. We welcome ideas, and we know that many of the ideas which people liked most in the cycle vision were pioneered in the London boroughs.”
In February 2014 the Mayor and TfL published six safety commitments, being:
1. To lead the way in achieving a 40 per cent reduction in the number of people killed or seriously injured on the capital’s roads by 2020 - with a longer term ambition of freeing London’s roads from death and serious injury;
2. To prioritise safety of the most vulnerable groups - pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists - which make up 80 per cent of serious and fatal collisions;
3. To provide substantial funding for road safety, invested in the most effective and innovative schemes;
4. To increase efforts with the police and enforcement agencies in tackling illegal, dangerous and careless road user behaviour that puts people at risk;
5. To campaign for changes in national and EU law to make roads, vehicles and drivers safer;
6. To work in partnership with boroughs and London’s road safety stakeholders to spread best practice and share data and information.
Latest Comments
- mike the bike 2 sec ago
To be fair to plod they are asking the DVSA to carry out a "Fitness to Drive" assessment on the elderly driver. This will involve a thirty-minute...
- hawkinspeter 2 min 29 sec ago
No, you're thinking of the rat-race....
- jaymack 2 min 46 sec ago
Somehow "veni vidi erravi" doesn't have quite the same ring as the original.
- lesterama 4 min 18 sec ago
Yep. We've got a network now. Next stop: let's make it fit for purpose.
- wtjs 5 min 17 sec ago
I bought the excellent Edge 1040 last year with a good, but not sensational, reduction, and this year I have bought a couple of expensive academic...
- anotherflat 57 min 9 sec ago
Having been through redundancy due to an employer going bankrupt, it's good to read that the employees should get their redundancy and pension...
- andystow 1 hour 18 min ago
Well, my aluminium mudguards are looking a little beat up. Might as well make my wallet match them.
- brooksby 2 hours 38 min ago
There are a lot of people out there who seem to think exactly that. It's like all those times that the traffic lights change as you are halfway...
- hawkinspeter 3 hours 55 min ago
That still annoys me about the BBC - iplayer only keeps some programmes available for a short time, so we have to rely on people making copies to...
Add new comment
51 comments
Segregation IS the answer to get many more people to ride bikes.
It's not about the few % that already cycle, but about making cycling feel safer for the majority that don't cycle yet.
Even at 20 mph or lower many people are frightened by sharing the road with vehicles, and this will help them.
Just saying they need to MTFU and that drivers need to behave nicer is rubbish because that is what the UK has been doing for the last 50 years, and we are now in a position where the roads are only for the fast, fit and brave.
We are not talking about just chucking a sign on a lamppost allowing cyclists to ride on the path, we are talking about proper wide, well surfaced space either dedicated to cyclists or shared with pedestrians where that volume is low. cycle paths in the Netherlands are good enough for chain gangs to use in preference to roads, and that should be the aim here too.
It never ceases to amaze me how those against "segregation" can conveniently ignore the fact that nations with good quality protected space for cycling have (by a very long way) the most cyclists across all demographics.
Just because *you* are comfortable weaving through buses, and most cycle facilities in the UK are crap, that doesn't entitle you to be blind to the experience of other countries. We've had this debate. We've tried persuading everyone to "just be nice and get along" and it isn't working.
And about those narrow roads in London...
http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2012/07/10/the-physical-constra...
Like you 'conveniently ignore' the fact that more segregation means more people thinking we have no right to be on the road? If you think drivers' attitudes are bad now ... what do you imagine them to be like then?
And you have it the wrong way round: the reason the Netherlands have a high percentage of people who cycle is not that a lot of money has been invested in segregated infrastructure there - the reason that a lot of money has been invested in segregated infrastructure there is that the Netherlands have a high percentage of people who cycle.
You can't magically turn the UK into the Netherlands by throwing money at it. Like any other change in any society, it always starts with the people, not the budget. There won't be any change in spending just for the sake of it. No politician is going to do that. The people have to demand it, like they did in the Netherlands. First, more (a lot more) people have to reconsider their relationship with their unsustainable and dangerous, petrol guzzling, private mobile castles. Then, and only then, there will a large enough base to effect a change in spending for the segregated infrastructure that you want.
If it was the other way round, you would find the drivers' attitudes towards cyclists on the road in the Netherlands to be just as bad if not worse than they are here. The opposite is the case. And that is why.
Until then, we all need to lobby for what little budget we are given to be invested in things that serve everyone, not just one part of us. And that is not more segregation while the cause of the problem is being left untouched and even encouraged!
^^^^^^ This, a thousand times.
Dear non-segregationists, when you have children of your own, you will change your tune.
I'm okay with mixing with traffic, been doing it all my life, don't particularly like it but I can deal with it.
However, my six-year-old can't get anywhere by cycling on the paths: every junction becomes a right royal PITA; she can't mix it in traffic either.
It is a really shameful state of affairs when to enjoy her Sunday cycle she needs a personal police protection unit. Yesterday we went on an organised ride with @camdencyclists and even with our highly visible police escort we had two incidents which required the police to intervene to protect us. Shameful.
We need segregated infra.
Yes we need segregated infrastructure, but it must not be an after thought. Most paths currently being built are shit, sustrans trails with moped gates which mean you can't get anything bar a normal bike through, try a tandem or cargo bike, let alone a trike.
New housing estates from day one should have GOOD cycle paths, all new roads should have GOOD cycle paths.
And on the quote, the police intervention should have involved the drivers having their cars towed away, crushed and the drivers licences being revoked.
It will NEVER be possible to have 100% segregation, so there will always be a need to cycle on roads, but any transgression by a motorist needs to be treated seriously.
Two prongs to the solution, infrastructure and enforcement, without both any attempt to improve the situation is going to fail.
why aren't bus drivers getting driver CPC courses? they need better cycle awareness too
They are, ahead of HGV drivers but Cycle Awareness is only an optional module. I have been campaigning for it to be compulsory. Please write to your MP and add your voice.
I'd love to see a central London blanket 20mph limit. The average speed is 11mph or so anyway, so it would only affect a few idiots - like the ones in expensive cars that just have to put their foot down for two seconds on Park Lane.
There's nothing wrong with segregated cycling lanes - look at countries that have high cycle usage - they all offer segregated zones but also maintain cycle infrastructure on main roads. It's not one or the other - it's both.
I note in many Euro cities that concrete, for example, is stored on building sites in "silos" to be drawn down as needed. These silos allow concrete mix to be delivered off-hours (or at least less frequently) and stored until needed. I see this only rarely in London.
If London buses have some sort of driver monitoring, the drivers either don't care or have managed to spoof it. The standard of driving from London bus drivers is shocking. They run red lights and swerve and brake violently for no good reason. I would say the good drivers are notable and in the minority. But then, it's a crap job and poorly paid for stressful work. Mystifies me why a Tube driver makes double a bus driver.
OMG! The woman cyclist on the consultation doc cover is not wearing a helmet! Report them to the ASA!
Good luck with that, I'm sure it will catch on.
A 20mph speed limit on all London roads that aren't dual carriageways and a strict liability law for motorists would further cut deaths and injury. Government motorist awareness adverts on TV and radio and static media would help as well.
A private hire cabby was behind a car on a narrow street that was giving way to me as I cycled the other way. The cabby pulled out around the car and headed straight for me. I stood my ground and flagged him down.
'You just overtook that car that was giving way to me.'
He looked surprised. (I assume he thought the car had just stopped because no driver would pull out to overtake another driver patiently giving way.)
'You realise cars have to give way to bikes?'
'What, bikes? No, only other cars.'
He wanted to dismiss me but he was carrying passengers so held his tongue.
'No mate. You have to give way to other road users, whether they be bikes, lorries, horses, pedestrians or unicyclists.'
Off he drove, shaking his head.
I might add he was from somewhere in the middle east by the look of him and I'm certain from my experience drivers from developing countries have even less regard for cyclists than our own homegrown black cab drivers, if such a thing were possible. It's ignorance. Pure ignorance.
Gilligan accepts the proposals aren't perfect and acknowledges improvements can always be made. This is a sensible approach. We aren't going to get segregated roads for cyclists in London because the roads are usually too damn narrow so get over it.
If Boris were serious he would sack Peter Hendy.
400 Killed or Seriously Injured a year by London buses, and that useless bastard gets a knighthood.
Gromski - Epsom Coaches tweaked the Euro 4 engine management system to limit the top speed of their buses used entirely within 30mph limit to 29.7mph (ie 1% tolerance)
As a result they found this delivered a reduction in minor damage crashes, a reduction in driver stress, and a reduction in fuel consumption.
The main big groups already use GreenFleet or similar packages to give a traffic light score on a driver's performance, with gentle braking & acceleration scoring high, and drivers getting rewarded for 'green light' rating and retrained for red light performance.
Moving on to trucks, the big problem is construction traffic, as few large logistics vehicles are operated inefficiently crawling round the city streets. The position is reflected in the crash figures, with tippers, skip trucks and concrete jiggers dominating the fatal crash reports. These cannot be stopped magically as they are removing or delivering from confined city sites where there is nowhere to stockpile material. What is daft though is to use off-road vehicles with ridiculous ground clearances to run on the road and on sites where H&S legislation now ensures that a firm and flat access route for trucks is provided. It is only the excuse that these trucks might be use in a quarry or ploughed field, or sold on for such work that we have this specification used on our city streets. TfL could change that by setting up a scale of a charges for unsuitable trucks operating within inner London
I was at the documentary about Jan Gehl (with the q&A afterwards) and one of the points that was made is that on one street alone at Bond Street, there are 35 different waste contractors that collect refuge from the shops. That is unnecessary duplication, a waste of resources and spurious cause of congestion.
As for the skip/tipper trucks that are related to construction, there is a trend to use contractor vehicles that engage self employed drivers on piece work so safety is a massive hindrance to making a profit. Reverse that culture (or introduce huge financial penalties on the vehicle owners) and then you might start getting somewhere.
So no commitment to segregated cycling? Just more investment in pie-in-the-sky vehicle modifications that will take years to adopt?
Segregated cycling is NOT a solution. That is the last thing most cyclists want to see.
A solution has to work for ALL not the just ones who want a certain thing, anything segregated in this country at the moment, I cannot take my bike on because it would block both lanes, also I believe you cannot take a mobility scooter onto a segregated lane at the moment, but you can take them onto a cycle lane.
To add to that, it's not just that it wouldn't work in most built up places. Even if it did work, it would be counter-productive for a large portion of cyclists simply because it would make the roads a more dangerous place to be in, as it would reinforce the misguided notion of a lot of drivers that cyclists don't belong on the road.
The general argument for segregated cycling is that it's the preferred option for inexperienced cyclists, children, and old folks. But their journeys are short, irregular, and thus already catered for - not perfectly, I admit, but sufficiently - by a large number of shared use paths and the like. Even pavements - and don't try to tell me a cop would stop a 6 year old on a BMX bike and fine them for pavement riding ...
Nothing wrong with cycling like that, in fact it's great to get started and/or keeping at it into old age - but please don't treat it as the solution to a problem those people don't really have, a problem that concerns a different kind of cyclist, those that use their bikes regularly and a lot, for general transport, commuting and sport - those people want the roads to be safer. And not be told to fuck off because "there's a perfectly good cycle path right there, get out of my way!"
The problem is not the bikes, they don't need to be 'segregated'. It's careless (mildly put) drivers, they do. They're what the solution, whatever it is, needs to take aim at. They're the ones making the roads unsafe. But since the vast majority of the voting populace drive and don't cycle this is a seemingly hopeless uphill battle - and will continue to be one until there is a sea change in attitude towards the motor car and, more generally, towards your fellow human being. I.e., probably never.
Until then, all we're likely to see is politicians pretending to do something by promising "better infrastructure" and other such 'grand ideas' ... while what they invest in those half-hearted schemes is less than 1% of what they keep investing in making the problem worse, i.e. more motorways, more cars, more means for lazy and ignorant people to remain lazy and ignorant.
It's a fucked up society. And most of us deserve it.
+1 segregation is not the answer except on fast roads such dual carriage ways . Elsewhere there is no such thing as a dangerous road, it's the disrespectful, self centred, impatient organic thing that's dangerous. Imagine the most "dangerous" section of road you know and remove all traffic. How bad is it now?
Download it, and read it. I'm only on chapter one, and there's lots in there about segregated design.
For anyone that still thinks it's a bad idea, take a look a Farringdon (Blackfriars through to Clerkenwell) as it is today, and the plans to transform it next year. I don't cycle in the center of London that often, but that's one of the routes I use. At peak hours, cyclists are the majority of users on that road, and yet it's bloody dangerous!
I'm hugely looking forward to that change, along with some of the others, just get on with it!
Related question - why aren't London buses speed limited?
London buses are speed limited, to 100k.
Pages