Dangerous - cycling in Dublin City Centre

Diddley Squat

I seen two cyclists taken out yesterday.
One got a wallop on Leeson St and then when I was going home I seen another getting turned over in Donnybrook.

The traffic is chaos , too many cars, too many bikes, too many mobile phones.

I really don't know what the answer is to be honest.
ANy ideas

doozerie

Be aware, be predictable, expect no-one else to be either of those.

ED E

Fire the Gardai, hire one of several UK forces that are actually dealing with traffic issues.

TC just got renamed to the RPU in line with the UK but nobody believes that'll change anything.

dobman88

Diddley Squat wrote: »

I seen two cyclists taken out yesterday.
One got a wallop on Leeson St and then when I was going home I seen another getting turned over in Donnybrook.

The traffic is chaos , too many cars, too many bikes, too many mobile phones.

I really don't know what the answer is to be honest.
ANy ideas

Do you mean you saw two incidents yesterday? Or you have seen incidents previously?

Light up, always expect the unexpected, always expect other people to be idiots and look after yourself, stick to the rules of the road like stopping at lights, always be aware of your surroundings but the big one is always expect other people to be idiots

magicbastarder

remember, approximately half of motorists are below average intelligence.

cyclists are clearly the exception to this rule.

eeeee

Was everyone ok? By the sounds of your post you seen the incidents occur, so I'm guessing you stuck around to make sure everyone was alright and gave information to attending emergency services?

ted1

dobman88 wrote: »

Diddley Squat wrote: »

I seen two cyclists taken out yesterday.
One got a wallop on Leeson St and then when I was going home I seen another getting turned over in Donnybrook.

The traffic is chaos , too many cars, too many bikes, too many mobile phones.

I really don't know what the answer is to be honest.
ANy ideas

Do you mean you saw two incidents yesterday? Or you have seen incidents previously?

Light up, always expect the unexpected, always expect other people to be idiots and look after yourself, stick to the rules of the road like stopping at lights, always be aware of your surroundings but the big one is always expect other people to be idiots

Sticking to the rules of the road ( written for cars) could get you killed, it’s the reason why more females are killed by HGVs than women.

punisher5112

I see cyclists do mad things, pedestrians do bat sh1t crazy stuff cars, trucks etc etc.

One thing to remember is people don't see bikes that includes pedestrians.

People look through most cyclists and see the vehicle instead it's been well studied.....



I will say one thing though people are really getting dumber ....

eeeee

To answer the title of the OP, cycling isn't dangerous in Dublin City Centre, thousands of cyclists make it in and out safely every single day, myself amongst them.

There is a need for better education certainly, amongst all road users. There aren't enough bicycles on the road yet, town is gridlocked with private cars daily. Also the more cyclists on the road the better drivers become at not driving into them.

doozerie

ted1 wrote: »

Sticking to the rules of the road ( written for cars) could get you killed, it’s the reason why more females are killed by HGVs than women.

That's a ridiculous statement.

magentis

ted1 wrote: »

Sticking to the rules of the road ( written for cars) could get you killed, it’s the reason why more females are killed by HGVs than women.

Quote of the day right there.

Wishbone Ash

ted1 wrote: »

... more females are killed by HGVs than women.

...and for years I was going around thinking women were females.

buffalo

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

...and for years I was going around thinking women were females.

I think he means more females are killed by HGVs than by other women.

...nope, never mind, still doesn't sound right.

Also I feel horrifically flippant punning about death.

Macy0161

The only way to change road behaviour is enforcement. The only way for consistent enforcement is camera/ ANPR. There seems to be no desire to move towards this though. At the moment, for any road user to get caught for any offence, you have to be in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong garda (except for a limited number of speed vans).

Jawgap

Diddley Squat wrote: »

I seen two cyclists taken out yesterday.
One got a wallop on Leeson St and then when I was going home I seen another getting turned over in Donnybrook.

The traffic is chaos , too many cars, too many bikes, too many mobile phones.

I really don't know what the answer is to be honest.
ANy ideas

Ban mobile phones?

....and I thought the turnover was ruled offside?

Dublin is not a dangerous city to cycle in* - people need to cop themselves on and stop taking isolated incidents they experience individually as representative of the entire city/cycling experience.


*College Green, however, is a complete cock-up.

Tombo2001

The new bike lane on O'Connell Street is a complete joke. None of the buses passing me are leaving anywhere close to 1.5 metres.

Its an accident waiting to happen, and probably more than one accident.

kirving

1.
The most important thing is to assume that you're invisible.

Will the car pull out from the side road even though I have my lights on? Assume they haven't seen you and they're gonna pull out in front of you.

2.
Next up is not to put yourself in a dangerous situation, regardless of what the law says you're allowed to do.

Just because the traffic is slow moving and you haven't seen an indicator, that the car won't turn left, change road position, or open a door.

3.
Lights on in the daytime - DRLs cut collisions hugely.

Tombo2001

Jawgap wrote: »

Ban mobile phones?

....and I thought the turnover was ruled offside?

Dublin is not a dangerous city to cycle in* - people need to cop themselves on and stop taking isolated incidents they experience individually as representative of the entire city/cycling experience.


*College Green, however, is a complete cock-up.

Is that a fact, or is that an opinion.

A lot of people believe its dangerous, as per thejournal.ie poll. Whats the definition of dangerous?

If your not happy with that definition how about this one - Dublin is a city where if you cycle regularly, then chances are you will experience frequent 'close calls' on a bike. Unless using your cop on means hopping up on the footpath, I would question any cyclist who disagrees with this.

Tombo2001

Kevin Irving wrote: »

1.
The most important thing is to assume that you're invisible.

Will the car pull out from the side road even though I have my lights on? Assume they haven't seen you and they're gonna pull out in front of you.

2.
Next up is not to put yourself in a dangerous situation, regardless of what the law says you're allowed to do.

Just because the traffic is slow moving and you haven't seen an indicator, that the car won't turn left, change road position, or open a door.

3.
Lights on in the daytime - DRLs cut collisions hugely.

I'd be interested in any evidence to show cyclists are at less risk if the have lights on in daytime.

My own view is that the dangerous overtakes is the source of most 'close calls'; I dont see how any of the above protects you from that. Its the traffic behind thats the primary risk, not the traffic in front.

Thinkingaboutit

ted1 wrote: »

Sticking to the rules of the road ( written for cars) could get you killed, it’s the reason why more females are killed by HGVs than women.

Eh? More women than men you mean.

It needs to be taken for granted in practical terms that a turning or lane changing HGV/bus, or one that is likely to, has an absolute right of way. Physics and the practical fact a HGV driver cannot see too much (if you cannot see his mirror, he probably cannot see you even with additional measures) overrules laws and regulations. HGVs are an extraordinary hazard when cycling, and cycling close to a manoeuvring one isn't remotely safe. Behind or clearly in front only. That's how I do it. As best I'm aware, the current revised ROTR, suggests cyclists be careful near HGVs (which themselves have notices on them).

Essentially, I'm not sure if the lack of rule breaking women cyclists is any notable reason for the disparity in deaths. Male cyclists might be able to accelerate away from dangerous places, disparity in size, basically a complex matter. HGVs/buses should also not be on streets not made for them, if possible. Way to many cars too.

Jawgap

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Is that a fact, or is that an opinion.

A lot of people believe its dangerous, as per thejournal.ie poll. Whats the definition of dangerous?

If your not happy with that definition how about this one - Dublin is a city where if you cycle regularly, then chances are you will experience frequent 'close calls' on a bike. Unless using your cop on means hopping up on the footpath, I would question any cyclist who disagrees with this.

It's a fact.....and yes i know people are going to cite data, even from such unimpeachable sources as the journal.ie, but they always neglect context and simply focus on bald figures.

I don't find it dangerous, as long as you have a decent set of lights, generally respect the rules of the road and apply some common sense - and if you are getting into repeated close calls, then perhaps the problem isn't the environment in which you are cycling.....

.....so, I disagree with you - feel free to question, but all such fearmongering does is discourage cycling and work to deprive people of one of the great, free, simple pleasures of living in a relatively flat, if somewhat occasionally damp, city.

Jawgap

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

...and for years I was going around thinking women were females.

....surely 'female' is an anatomic description whereas as "woman" is the social construct through which any person can choose to express their identity?

shootermacg

Another dangerous issue is bus, lorry and van drivers stopping in front of turn offs allowing oncoming traffic to turn right.

I have no issues with cars doing this, because visibility is OK, but, if you are going to be doing this in a bus or lorry, for the love of god stop well in advance of the lane to give the poor cyclists a chance.

I pretty much come to a stop in these circumstances and I've still had some close calls.

eeeee

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Is that a fact, or is that an opinion.

A lot of people believe its dangerous, as per thejournal.ie poll. Whats the definition of dangerous?

If your not happy with that definition how about this one - Dublin is a city where if you cycle regularly, then chances are you will experience frequent 'close calls' on a bike. Unless using your cop on means hopping up on the footpath, I would question any cyclist who disagrees with this.

Thousands and thousands of cyclists go through Dublin city centre every single day without incident.
It's really not that dangerous.
That's not to say things can't be improved, or should be, drastically even (particularly when it comes to infrastructure). Close passes happen, but on my commutes and spins they're very much in the minority. I'm passed safely by innumerable cars daily. Close passes and other dangerous behaviours towards cyclists are very serious, definitely, but cycling around Dublin isn't inherently dangerous. That better education needs to happen is doubtless. Attitudes are hardening and this is obviously problematic.

Yes you will have incidents if you're on the road, as all road users will have. But it's a safe, free and very enjoyable activity the (vast) majority of the time.

Wishbone Ash

Tombo2001 wrote: »

The new bike lane on O'Connell Street is a complete joke. None of the buses passing me are leaving anywhere close to 1.5 metres. ..

Leaving aside the fact that it is not a legal requirement, the suggestion is 1 metre in a 50/30km/h zone.

schemingbohemia

nee wrote: »

Thousands and thousands of cyclists go through Dublin city centre every single day without incident.
It's really not that dangerous.
That's not to say things can't be improved, or should be, drastically even (particularly when it comes to infrastructure). Close passes happen, but on my commutes and spins they're very much in the minority. I'm passed safely by innumerable cars daily. Close passes and other dangerous behaviours towards cyclists are very serious, definitely, but cycling around Dublin isn't inherently dangerous. That better education needs to happen is doubtless. Attitudes are hardening and this is obviously problematic.

Yes you will have incidents if you're on the road, as all road users will have. But it's a safe, free and very enjoyable activity the (vast) majority of the time.

+1 There were 10 million cycle journeys (at least) in Dublin in 2016, there was 1 death, that's 1 death too many but it is safe, it could be safer. It's a lot safer than it was in the 80s/90s.

What needs to happen is for vehicle drivers to pay more attention, put their mobile phones away, indicate clearly in advance of manoeuvres and be more aware of people cycling, there are more of us now than for a couple of decades and awareness is growing but very slowly.
Vehicle drivers

droidus

"The front rank of cycle-safe cities worldwide are in northern Europe. City Cycling, published in 2012 and edited by John Pucher and Ralph Buehler, calculated the average number of annual cyclist deaths over the previous five years for every 10,000 daily cycle commuters in big European and American cities. London, with an average of 1.1 deaths per 10,000 commuters, fared better than New York’s 3.8. But both lagged far behind the 0.3 annual average deaths in Copenhagen and 0.4 in Amsterdam."

https://ig.ft.com/sites/urban-cycling/

I havent read that book and dont know if they have data for Dublin, but I would say that Dublin probably falls below London and is (statistically at least) less dangerous.

The frustrating thing is that it could be a LOT less dangerous with some decent infrastructure and a move away from the appalling car culture we have in Ireland.

doozerie

Macy0161 wrote: »

The only way to change road behaviour is enforcement.

I completely agree that enforcement is necessary but at best it is a blunt instrument that gets applied after the fact so basically after someone has already done something potentially dangerous and which is covered by the Rules of the Road. Apart from the fact that the Rules of the Road don't cover all behaviour anyway, I'd prefer that fellow road users didn't endanger me and others in the first place.

So my preferred approach is education first, to encourage understanding and empathy. Far too many people (not just motorists but cyclists and pedestrians too) adopt an approach of not giving a toss about anyone else while using the roads. Education for all road users of their potential impact on others would address the unreasonable behaviour of some, and hopefully many, of those people I believe. And for the rest who simply choose to be ignorant and/or obnoxious regardless, effective and consistent enforcement is necessary.

Enforcement without education will never be an effective solution, in my opinion.

magicbastarder

if you ask me, the only sort of education which will work is education via punishment.
education on its own will probably work with the 99% of motorists you don't need to worry about in the first place.

doozerie

magicbastarder wrote: »

if you ask me, the only sort of education which will work is education via punishment.
education on its own will probably work with the 99% of motorists you don't need to worry about in the first place.

The first challenge there is defining an effective punishment. For motorists, removing someone's right to drive is generally seen as a severe punishment (not nearly severe enough typically, but that's another discussion), yet how often do you read of motorists in court who amongst other things were driving without a license? As a punishment, it simply doesn't work for far too many people.

Or take a prison sentence, such a rarity for even the most appalling of behaviour on the roads, do you really believe that someone serving a prison sentence for a motoring offence will be a better/safer driver once they leave prison? Sure, no-one want to go (back to) prison, but even the admittedly faint threat of prison wasn't enough to stop them behaving in a way which led to them getting a prison sentence in the first place, so as a threat it's just not effective (enough).

And harder still is to define those 99% of motorists you don't need to worry about in the first place. Most of the worrying incidents I've witnessed or been subjected to on the road were not the result of malicious behaviour, but the result of regular people (like me) making poor decisions without thinking through the potential consequences. Such casual behaviour, even if not malicious, is no less dangerous all too often. And every last one of us potentially falls into that camp, every last one of us (including cyclsists) can be a danger to others in any given moment on any given day.

When I am driving my car and I'm choosing not to overtake the cyclist(s) ahead, despite the protests of the impatient motorist directly behind me, it's not because I am one of those motorists that you don't need to worry about. I'm as keen to get from A to B as anyone else, I'll overtake that cyclist(s) the first chance I get. But because I've been on the receiving end of such behaviour, I understand the risks involved if I overtake on a narrow road, or into a blind bend, etc., so I wait until I think it'll be safe.

My sense of what amounts to safe driving behaviour is based on, and biased by, my years of experience of riding a bike. Those years have been an education and without them I would probably be just as likely as anyone else to do a dangerous overtake which puts that cyclist(s) at risk because I am in a hurry and "they'll be grand" but mostly because I don't care in the least about them because they are "other".

Of course there are those for whom education won't work. There is a minority of people out there who are simply sociopathic, they'd run over their own mother if she were to get in their way. For those people I don't see any alternative to consistent enforcement paired with punishment - it won't solve the problem of their behaviour but it might minimise it.

ED E

85% of motorists admit texting and driving.

Nobody actually thinks its safe, or if they do they're too stupid to hold a drivers licence anyways. You're 23 x more likely to crash. People are selfish.


Until AGS are taking phones and crushing them beneath their boot or the monetary equivalent people won't cop the hell on.