Well, so much for that "irrational fear cyclists have of come from behind collisions"
#1
----
Thread Starter
Well, so much for that "irrational fear cyclists have of come from behind collisions"
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,546
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,434 Times
in
1,346 Posts
No dispute, nor surprise at the overall statistics. But I'm curious about how it would play out if only high density urban riding were factored.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
#3
Cycle Dallas
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of Gar, TX
Posts: 3,777
Bikes: Dulcinea--2017 Kona Rove & a few others
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
5 Posts
Don't misinterpret the data.
Rear-end collisions are rarest type of bicycle/auto accident (3.8% of collisions).
The 40% is referring to the percentage of fatality collisions.
You are far more likely to collide with a car at an intersection. In the rare event that you are rear-ended, the mortality rate is higher.
Rear-end collisions are rarest type of bicycle/auto accident (3.8% of collisions).
The 40% is referring to the percentage of fatality collisions.
You are far more likely to collide with a car at an intersection. In the rare event that you are rear-ended, the mortality rate is higher.
#4
----
Thread Starter
Don't misinterpret the data.
Rear-end collisions are rarest type of bicycle/auto accident (3.8% of collisions).
The 40% is referring to the percentage of fatality collisions.
You are far more likely to collide with a car at an intersection. In the rare event that you are rear-ended, the mortality rate is higher.
Rear-end collisions are rarest type of bicycle/auto accident (3.8% of collisions).
The 40% is referring to the percentage of fatality collisions.
You are far more likely to collide with a car at an intersection. In the rare event that you are rear-ended, the mortality rate is higher.
#6
----
Thread Starter
Odd that in my life I've had three close friends killed in separate cycling accidents (2 hit from behind and the other the driver crossed the lane and hit them head on) and know not a soul who has died of typhus. Maybe if I did I might have more fear of the disease. Maybe I need to broaden my horizons, get to know fewer cyclists and more gals named Mary. Is there a typhus forum.net? I'll check it out.
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NA
Posts: 4,267
Bikes: NA
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
I'm no VCer but the counterpoint here makes sense to me:
Joining the Chorus of Ignorance - i am traffic
I also trust FARS data far more than the amalgamation of media reports used by the LAB.
Joining the Chorus of Ignorance - i am traffic
I also trust FARS data far more than the amalgamation of media reports used by the LAB.
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Bay Area, Calif.
Posts: 7,239
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
I'm no VCer but the counterpoint here makes sense to me:
Joining the Chorus of Ignorance - i am traffic
I also trust FARS data far more than the amalgamation of media reports used by the LAB.
Joining the Chorus of Ignorance - i am traffic
I also trust FARS data far more than the amalgamation of media reports used by the LAB.
The Bicycling!/LAB view seems to be that bike lanes and especially protected cycle tracks would make a big difference in these cases. I think you need a much more detailed look at what actually happened in the crashes before drawing that conclusion. The three most recent local cyclist fatalities where I know the details were all 'hit from behind' but I doubt that any reasonable lane or cycle track would have made a difference. They involved motorists who had totally lost control of their vehicles. In addition to hitting and killing the cyclists, their vehicles also ran over curbs, took out fire hydrants, light poles, assorted street signs, and, in one case, demolished most of a business storefront.
Furthermore one needs to examine what types of collision might be increased in danger by having cycle tracks. Right- and left-hooks are already a serious problem and if cyclists are less visible to motorists planning to turn as a result of being separated on a cycle track then it might well increase both the number and severity of such collisions.
#9
Seńior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 13,749
Bikes: Windsor Fens, Giant Seek 0 (2014, Alfine 8 + discs)
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 446 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
Every fatal accident that's happened around where I live since I've been here (20 years) has been a from-behind collision. Usually distracted drivers texting or screwing with their phones in some way.
__________________
Work: the 8 hours that separates bike rides.
Work: the 8 hours that separates bike rides.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
Why is it controversial? Fatalities are more likely from collisions with high speed vehicles. We have greater exposure to high speed vehicles from behind than from in front or from the sides. Therefore more fatalities can be expected from collisions from the rear. It's no surprise.
#11
Cycle Dallas
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of Gar, TX
Posts: 3,777
Bikes: Dulcinea--2017 Kona Rove & a few others
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
5 Posts
It's controversial because it makes riding on the street seem more dangerous than it is.
The study doesn't account for any non-fatal accidents. It is based entirely on news reports and blogs.
The study doesn't account for any non-fatal accidents. It is based entirely on news reports and blogs.
#13
Cycle Dallas
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of Gar, TX
Posts: 3,777
Bikes: Dulcinea--2017 Kona Rove & a few others
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
5 Posts
I believe the intent of the study was to promote bike lanes, especially protected bike lanes. However, by publishing it the way they did, with the wording they used, it is liable to scare people away from commuting and transportation cycling.
I have nothing against bike lanes, but I do recognize the value of VC, (somewhat necessary due to lack of bike lanes in Dallas).
I have nothing against bike lanes, but I do recognize the value of VC, (somewhat necessary due to lack of bike lanes in Dallas).
#14
----
Thread Starter
They are simply taking the means by which most cyclist/auto fatalities occur and advocating for solutions. Just because they don't include every knuckle scrape cyclists have while getting their bike out of the garage in order to gild the lily of cycling safety is way beside the point. It's about reducing fatalities.
In the grand scheme of things yeah, maybe 700 cyclist deaths per year (that's roughly 2 of us a day) in the US doesn't seem like much to some people. Personally, I find it unacceptable and, in fact, as safe as cycling may be be it is way more dangerous than it needs to be in the US. Something needs to get done but nothing will get done if we can't even agree that it is a problem and that it needs to be addressed.
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Posts: 7,048
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 509 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times
in
8 Posts
I'm sorry but I have to take issue with this constant drumbeat of "maKing riding on the street seem more dangerous than it is."
They are simply taking the means by which most cyclist/auto fatalities occur and advocating for solutions. Just because they don't include every knuckle scrape cyclists have while getting their bike out of the garage in order to gild the lily of cycling safety is way beside the point. It's about reducing fatalities.
In the grand scheme of things yeah, maybe 700 cyclist deaths per year (that's roughly 2 of us a day) in the US doesn't seem like much to some people. Personally, I find it unacceptable and, in fact, as safe as cycling may be be it is way more dangerous than it needs to be in the US. Something needs to get done but nothing will get done if we can't even agree that it is a problem and that it needs to be addressed.
They are simply taking the means by which most cyclist/auto fatalities occur and advocating for solutions. Just because they don't include every knuckle scrape cyclists have while getting their bike out of the garage in order to gild the lily of cycling safety is way beside the point. It's about reducing fatalities.
In the grand scheme of things yeah, maybe 700 cyclist deaths per year (that's roughly 2 of us a day) in the US doesn't seem like much to some people. Personally, I find it unacceptable and, in fact, as safe as cycling may be be it is way more dangerous than it needs to be in the US. Something needs to get done but nothing will get done if we can't even agree that it is a problem and that it needs to be addressed.
I also have my doubts about LAB's agenda. From their "bike friendly" criteria, it looks like they are more concerned with advocating for segregation than with safety.
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,546
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,434 Times
in
1,346 Posts
When trying to solve a problem, it's important that the solution is directly responsive to the actual problem. This is equally true for infrastructure problems as it is for bicycle repair.
Aggregate data combining urban and rural riding may mask the fact that different conditions breed different types of accidents. It's very possible that a large percentage of "from the back" accidents happen on open roads while more intersection accidents happen in cities (not saying this is a fact, just a realistic possibility).
Then, if based on this misleading (possibly) data, we apply a solution more suited to the open road in an urban setting, we may not get the benefit we're hoping for. As a matter of fact, if that solution solves a highway problem at the expensive of worsening city problems, then not only won't we see benefits, we might actually make things worse.
Reducing accidental death and injury, is a laudable goal, but we have to try by using solutions that address the causes of injury where and how they happen. These will be different on open roads than in cities.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
#17
Senior Member
Yes it is an irrational fear. Especially if you consider that the risk of an American cyclist dying while on a bicycle is as big as a random 21 year old American dying. That means the risk of dying on a bike is right on par with ... the risk of dying while being alive.
To put another thing in perspective, the health benefits from cycling take a serious chunk out of the bike fatality number. This means that although there is a risk from cycling relative to doing nothing, a big part of that risk is already offset by the fact that cyclists die less from other stuff.
To put another thing in perspective, the health benefits from cycling take a serious chunk out of the bike fatality number. This means that although there is a risk from cycling relative to doing nothing, a big part of that risk is already offset by the fact that cyclists die less from other stuff.
#18
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
I'm no VCer but the counterpoint here makes sense to me:
Joining the Chorus of Ignorance - i am traffic
I also trust FARS data far more than the amalgamation of media reports used by the LAB.
Joining the Chorus of Ignorance - i am traffic
I also trust FARS data far more than the amalgamation of media reports used by the LAB.
“Except for accidents that resulted from the motor vehicle being out of control, it seems reasonable to assume that most Class D accidents would not have occurred if an on-street bicycle lane had been present and the bicyclist had been riding in it. However, the problem in recommending on-street bicycle lanes as a countermeasure stems from the cost-effectiveness of this approach. First, consider that 46% of the fatal and 44% of the non-fatal overtaking accidents occurred in a rural area where bicycle traffic tends to be low and where it would be necessary to widen the paved area in order to accommodate an on-street bicycle lane.”
#19
Cycle Dallas
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of Gar, TX
Posts: 3,777
Bikes: Dulcinea--2017 Kona Rove & a few others
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
5 Posts
I'm sorry but I have to take issue with this constant drumbeat of "maKing riding on the street seem more dangerous than it is."
They are simply taking the means by which most cyclist/auto fatalities occur and advocating for solutions. Just because they don't include every knuckle scrape cyclists have while getting their bike out of the garage in order to gild the lily of cycling safety is way beside the point. It's about reducing fatalities.
In the grand scheme of things yeah, maybe 700 cyclist deaths per year (that's roughly 2 of us a day) in the US doesn't seem like much to some people. Personally, I find it unacceptable and, in fact, as safe as cycling may be be it is way more dangerous than it needs to be in the US. Something needs to get done but nothing will get done if we can't even agree that it is a problem and that it needs to be addressed.
They are simply taking the means by which most cyclist/auto fatalities occur and advocating for solutions. Just because they don't include every knuckle scrape cyclists have while getting their bike out of the garage in order to gild the lily of cycling safety is way beside the point. It's about reducing fatalities.
In the grand scheme of things yeah, maybe 700 cyclist deaths per year (that's roughly 2 of us a day) in the US doesn't seem like much to some people. Personally, I find it unacceptable and, in fact, as safe as cycling may be be it is way more dangerous than it needs to be in the US. Something needs to get done but nothing will get done if we can't even agree that it is a problem and that it needs to be addressed.
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NA
Posts: 4,267
Bikes: NA
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
Still...the take down of LAB survey methodology is pretty damning. I also did not realize that FARS overtaking data includes many accident scenarios that would not be viewed as overtaking by most cyclists.
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NA
Posts: 4,267
Bikes: NA
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 885
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#24
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
Lets not support bike infrastructure because there are rural area? Nonsense. That being said that particular comment was embedded in a quote that was being cited in a different context..
Still...the take down of LAB survey methodology is pretty damning. I also did not realize that FARS overtaking data includes many accident scenarios that would not be viewed as overtaking by most cyclists.
Still...the take down of LAB survey methodology is pretty damning. I also did not realize that FARS overtaking data includes many accident scenarios that would not be viewed as overtaking by most cyclists.
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NA
Posts: 4,267
Bikes: NA
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
Many cycling fatalities in Portland occurred in bike lanes (which is not at all surprising given how common they are). It never occurred to me that being hit from behind *in a bike lane* would be classified as "overtaking".
Last edited by spare_wheel; 08-12-14 at 03:29 PM.