Journalism and cycling

timmyjimmy

zell12 wrote: »

And look our leader and the leader of the Danes not wearing helmets in Copenhagen a few weeks ago, yet silence in the media on safety

Leo and the Danish are wearing those 'snood' type helmets, the ones that blow when they sense a collision.

magicbastarder

tomasrojo wrote: »

The analogy that occurred to me was somebody waiting in line to buy a lump hammer in Woodie's, when someone cuts in front of them, so they swing the hammer just past their head to teach them a lesson, and everyone in the queue starts talking about how awful people who cut in line are.

another analogy to the 'but i didn't hit you' excuse is that if i went around throwing punches at people and deliberately missing their nose by an inch, society would deem me a danger pretty quickly. but it's much more acceptable to adopt this approach with a car.

Tombo2001

The anti cycling ranting is becoming so ubiquitous these days.

On the parents WhatsApp group, big discussion ….. no hi viz, so dangerous.

On the work intranet - some punter takes it upon himself to urge all cyclists to light up.

At the butchers last week, I arrive in with the bike helmet. Within 90 seconds the butcher is whining about cyclists going two abreast in rush and holding up the traffic.

It really would get you down.

I've switched off most social media, stopped listening to radio discussions etc...

Tombo2001

magicbastarder wrote: »

another analogy to the 'but i didn't hit you' excuse is that if i went around throwing punches at people and deliberately missing their nose by an inch, society would deem me a danger pretty quickly. but it's much more acceptable to adopt this approach with a car.

I just think the only answer here is segregated bike lanes.

People/ Drivers will never stop being dicks in this country.

jjpep

Tombo2001 wrote: »

I just think the only answer here is segregated bike lanes.

People/ Drivers will never stop being dicks in this country.

A million times this. I moved to Sweden this summer. Segregated lanes everywhere, even 15kms out to local villages outside the city. There is no cyclist/motorist nonsense. The very idea of it being a big deal (how you get around the place) is just confusing to people up here.

CramCycle

jjpep wrote: »

A million times this. I moved to Sweden this summer. Segregated lanes everywhere, even 15kms out to local villages outside the city. There is no cyclist/motorist nonsense. The very idea of it being a big deal (how you get around the place) is just confusing to people up here.

I'd actually be in favour of segregated bus lanes at this point or ANPR cameras on them. Several points along the N11 bus lane get so jammed with cars, the segregated bus lane becomes pointless at junctions. Buses become near useless as they are held up so much.

Tombo2001

CramCycle wrote: »

I'd actually be in favour of segregated bus lanes at this point or ANPR cameras on them. Several points along the N11 bus lane get so jammed with cars, the segregated bus lane becomes pointless at junctions. Buses become near useless as they are held up so much.

I'd agree with this.

There seems to be a few basic things wrong with Dublin Bus.

(I) Bus lanes being abused.

(II) At this point, get the taxis out of bus lanes. What is the point.

(III) 90% of buses take the same route through O'Connell St and up D'Olier St. Its a massive log jam.

(IV) Too many routes, not enough frequency.

Improved bus usage is crucial. The volumes of traffic into Dublin is monumental - places like Phibsboro, Drumcondra, Rathmines they are just choked. Its gridlock for 18 hours of the day.

Tombo2001

Another important thing to change here is mindset.

People hear about Bus Connects or the new Metro Line.

And their angle is - I am in gridlock every day and this will make my car commute easier.

There is absolutely no consideration of - If this comes in, then I can start taking the bus.....

Duckjob

Tombo2001 wrote: »

I just think the only answer here is segregated bike lanes.

People/ Drivers will never stop being dicks in this country.

I think peoples attitudes will be the last/slowest thing to change and will only occur well after the proper infrastructure is put in.

Proper infrastructure means people feeling safer, which means more people get out of their cars and onto bikes, which means over time biking because a normal part of getting around, which means the attempted marginalization of people cycling becomes a social nonsense practiced only be a few cranky fools.


Apart from the stronger legislation to protect vulnerable road users in NL, the practice of cyclist is so normal that everyone would either cycle themselves at times, or has family or friends that do, so there's no us and them like there is here.

Tombo2001

Duckjob wrote: »

I think peoples attitudes will be the last/slowest thing to change and will only occur well after the proper infrastructure is put in.

Proper infrastructure means people feeling safer, which means more people get out of their cars and onto bikes, which means over time biking because a normal part of getting around, which means the attempted marginalization of people cycling becomes a social nonsense practiced only be a few cranky fools.


Apart from the stronger legislation to protect vulnerable road users in NL, the practice of cyclist is so normal that everyone would either cycle themselves at times, or has family or friends that do, so there's no us and them like there is here.

The one thing I can say that cycling has going for it - if you do it a few times, then its hard to get back in the car.

If you could get people to try it just once, then a lot of them will stick with it.

Mickiemcfist

Tombo2001 wrote: »

The one thing I can say that cycling has going for it - if you do it a few times, then its hard to get back in the car.

If you could get people to try it just once, then a lot of them will stick with it.

Yea I started cycling because of the Luas strikes last year & haven't looked back since.

magicbastarder

Mickiemcfist wrote: »

Yea I started cycling because of the Luas strikes last year & haven't looked back since.

you really should do, it's dangerous not to check behind you occasionally, especially when changing lanes.

Pinch Flat

magicbastarder wrote: »

you really should do, it's dangerous not to check behind you occasionally, especially when changing lanes.

Going forward, no need for these types of comments

Macy0161

Proper infrastructure is just an excuse really in my opinion. On debates of public transport, people dismiss the (relatively) quick fix of buses saying heavy rail is the only answer. Consciously or unconsciously, this is because heavy rail will not happen, or will take years, and that is their excuse.

I know plenty of people who live, or could make work, segregated bike lanes for their commute. Like bus routes, people expect it to their doors. People saying they won’t do it for the sake of 200m!

Tombo2001 wrote: »

There is absolutely no consideration of - If this comes in, then I can start taking the bus.....

This is definitely true - had this debate with a colleague who was giving out about the plans to restrict cars in the city centre, after saying the buses take too long. A supposedly intelligent person couldn't make the connection. And I couldn't get the penny to drop either.

Mickiemcfist

Macy0161 wrote: »

Proper infrastructure is just an excuse really in my opinion. On debates of public transport, people dismiss the (relatively) quick fix of buses saying heavy rail is the only answer. Consciously or unconsciously, this is because heavy rail will not happen, or will take years, and that is their excuse.

To be fair, I think the lack of proper bus infrastructure in many places (i.e. bus lanes in places like Dundrum etc.) means that a bus takes as long as a car anyway, however Luas/Darts are relatively consistent at least. Same people would probably give out about busconnects too though.

Macy0161

Mickiemcfist wrote: »

Same people would probably give out about busconnects too though.

"Save the Trees" for environmental reasons, obviously!

Stark

Mickiemcfist wrote: »

To be fair, I think the lack of proper bus infrastructure in many places (i.e. bus lanes in places like Dundrum etc.) means that a bus takes as long as a car anyway, however Luas/Darts are relatively consistent at least. Same people would probably give out about busconnects too though.

"probably"? It's already been plagued by the usual NIMBY protestors.

beauf

Macy0161 wrote: »

Proper infrastructure is just an excuse really in my opinion. On debates of public transport, people dismiss the (relatively) quick fix of buses saying heavy rail is the only answer. Consciously or unconsciously, this is because heavy rail will not happen, or will take years, and that is their excuse.

I know plenty of people who live, or could make work, segregated bike lanes for their commute. Like bus routes, people expect it to their doors. People saying they won’t do it for the sake of 200m!


This is definitely true - had this debate with a colleague who was giving out about the plans to restrict cars in the city centre, after saying the buses take too long. A supposedly intelligent person couldn't make the connection. And I couldn't get the penny to drop either.

That depends. Some bus routes are slow not because of traffic but because they do these massive looping routes. Also because there are physical bottlenecks where they've (recently) built right to the edge of the existing road, leaving no room for a bus lane or perhaps a filter lane.

When I was commuting on the bike it was 44~60mins cross the city center. I would say there are a lot of sections not suitable for a novice cyclist commuter. I used to take a 10min detour to avoid the most hairy parts of the route. It would be vastly improved by dedicated infrastructure in certain locations. Then it would be accessible for wider skill levels.

tomasrojo

timmyjimmy wrote: »

Leo and the Danish are wearing those 'snood' type helmets, the ones that blow when they sense a collision.

I think you're right. Not often you see those. I've seen one "in the wild" in Ireland.

Stark

But what's the point of one if people can't see that you're wearing it

tomasrojo

Well, this will perhaps head into Helmet Megathread territory, but there is some evidence that close passes are more common for people wearing helmets, so I suppose you could argue that this gives you protection without the close passes.

They're widely derided though. I guess because they've had a few cases where they've gone off unexpectedly, and they look preposterous once deployed. And they're very expensive, and need to be replaced after they deploy.

magicbastarder

i just find the notion that while yes, his handlers are worried that he could be involved in an incident which could injure him, they were so concerned about it to get him to wear one - even though the chances of being swiped by a wayward cement truck were probably a *little* less than you or i would face, given there were two prime ministers out for a slow cycle which was also a photo op.

Stark

Well you never know. Maybe if JFK had been wearing a bicycle helmet, he would be alive today.

tomasrojo

He might just have been inoculating himself against several days of nonsensical hand-wringing about his reckless sending out the wrong message, such as Oisín O'Connor has been the centre of since his brief appearance on the RTÉ news.

magicbastarder

i assume oisin has a real job, and it's not just 'being paid to expose his brain to serious injury'?
must have been a fun few days for him.

Pinch Flat

I wear a helmet, safe in the knowledge that if I’m hit by a motorist doing a close pass at 100kph that I can simply dust myself down, get back on my bike and get on with the rest of my day.

Tombo2001

Nice bit of coverage in the Examiner yesterday.

Seems that if cyclists want a fair hearing in the media, then go to Cork.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/less-than-5-of-cyclists-believe-cork-infrastructure-is-fit-for-purpose-960725.html

Tombo2001

Stark wrote: »

"probably"? It's already been plagued by the usual NIMBY protestors.

I joined Drumcondra Social on facebook, and its interesting to see this play out between the NIMBYs as you say, who are more IMBY in this case - they don't want to lose the number 11 stopping on their street even if there are 6 other buses passing along 300 yards away - and the people that (colours to mast here) are suggesting logic and reason as to why Bus Connect goes ahead.

The problem to some degree with Bus Connect is that if there is ANY weak point in the plans, then everyone who is against it will row in behind that weak point, even if it doesn't affect them at all.

So in this case, the weak point is that no matter what you do elsewhere - once the buses hit Phibsboro you are in single lane traffic and there is no avoiding the gridlock.

Tenzor07

New York invests in cycling, hopefully Dublin will do the same... some day...



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/01/new-york-city-bike-lanes-car-culture

zell12

Newstalk doing their commuter hell series again 04-08 November
We will discuss the issues that matter to commuters, highlights concerns, offer solutions and some fun and levity throughout on air and on social content.
https://www.newstalk.com/news/commuter-hell-914731