TD Ciaran Cannon hit by SUV, suffers serious injury

Del2005

Podge_irl wrote: »

It is yet another thing to be worried about though. To be fair, I'm unsure how it impacts cyclists, but the size and formation of the bonnet makes SUVs more dangerous when hitting pedestrians at least than a standard saloon.

Euro NCAP would disagree with that. A 2019 Golf is worse for pedestrians than a 2017 T-Roc. Same car diferent bodies

CoBo55 wrote: »

Would American stuff be over 3500kg, not that I'll ever be driving one.

The American SUVs are all over 3500kg. They tried to improve the fuel efficiency of their fleet by enforcing lower emissions on cars, so the American's started using lite trucks which weren't included and the SUV's came from that. If the vehicle has lights on the roof it's C1 vehicle here

Bass Reeves

magicbastarder wrote: »

tom scott did a video on that junction, and relied on the article mentioned as a source:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYeeTvitvFU

There is a simple solution that will give some immediate relief in this case. 4 stop signs. They use it a lot in the US on junctions like that. Enforcement can be carried out by installing cameras and warning stop signs 50-70 meters in advance of junction stop signs.

If power is not available then solar and battery would give limited enforcement. Camera that activate on traffic approach would help.

magicbastarder

Bass Reeves wrote: »

There is a simple solution that will give some immediate relief in this case. 4 stop signs.

not sure if that'd be an immediate solution - given that the motorists seem to be running the stop sign because they see no traffic, it's certainly not a given that the cyclists will stop if they see no traffic (though they've got better visibility than the motorists tbf)

liamog

Bass Reeves wrote: »

There is a simple solution that will give some immediate relief in this case. 4 stop signs.

4 way stops are ridiculous, better to install a roundabout, it removes the guessing the game and can be planted to make it look nice.

Bass Reeves

liamog wrote: »

4 way stops are ridiculous, better to install a roundabout, it removes the guessing the game and can be planted to make it look nice.

Roundabouts would be unusual on long sections of roadways. I saw that such action put in place locally at an accident blackspot. Now it was only three stop signs. By right it should have been four. But it worked. From three sides visibility was poor and the cars stopping at the two stop signs were still in danger from cars coming from one side in particular. The third stop sign solved the issue.

As I said it's a common solution in the US even in build up area's. They have a zero tolerance of non adherence to stop signs. In the US stop means stop not slow down as some Irish drivers and cyclists think.

We have seen stop signs put on narrow bridges which solved accident issues. As the video said there is an issue with what they do as the area is a national heritage area. They finding it hard to install lighting and rumble strips or reconfigure the roads

After that you are into signage and enforcement. Signage and speed limits are about the best option l ft, not perfect but they can help the issue.

It's a bit like being visible. I am farming it's the law now that I must have a beacon on my tractor on a public road. This is not because the tractor is more dangerous than any other particular vehicle when on the road. It is however because the vehicle I drive tend to be slower than other vehicles and the lighting configuration different ( front lights are close together and do not enhance the width of the vehicle) because of this there was a danger other road users would not realize how wide my vehicle was, how far ahead of them it was and how slow I was traveling.

magicbastarder

again, people approaching a roundabout will often behave the same way as they will approaching the junction above though - 'nothing coming from the right, safe to plough through'.
seems to be that the safest option (though pricey, as mentioned) is to stagger the junction.

Bass Reeves

magicbastarder wrote: »

again, people approaching a roundabout will often behave the same way as they will approaching the junction above though - 'nothing coming from the right, safe to plough through'.
seems to be that the safest option (though pricey, as mentioned) is to stagger the junction.

Yes staggering junction are the best option. However the presenter said there was opposition to this as it was a national heritage area. If you cannot get the ideal solution, a new bridge, taking away a bend or in this case staggering a junction you use signage to improve the situation.

Del2005

Bass Reeves wrote: »

There is a simple solution that will give some immediate relief in this case. 4 stop signs. They use it a lot in the US on junctions like that. Enforcement can be carried out by installing cameras and warning stop signs 50-70 meters in advance of junction stop signs.

If power is not available then solar and battery would give limited enforcement. Camera that activate on traffic approach would help.

People ignore stop signs and red lights so they aren't the solution. It works in the US because of rigid enforcement along with regular speed checks outside schools, but they don't enforce DUI!

km991148

LillySV wrote: »

Since we are generalizing …I’ve no hesitation in saying over 90% of cyclists are self entitled inconsiderate pricks

Chips Lovell wrote: »

Well, as an Audi owner, I'd have no hesitation in saying that 90 percent of Audi drivers are p***ks.

yeah you are both right. 90% of people are pricks.

liamog

magicbastarder wrote: »

again, people approaching a roundabout will often behave the same way as they will approaching the junction above though - 'nothing coming from the right, safe to plough through'.
seems to be that the safest option (though pricey, as mentioned) is to stagger the junction.

I would of thought that area could be fitted with a roundabout like the ones in Phoenix Park, I think it really improves the area.

magicbastarder

maybe another option would simply be to install a speed bump 50m or 100m back from the junction, on the minor road; break the consistency of the speed of the car so the cyclist should pop out of the blind spot.

Bass Reeves

magicbastarder wrote: »

maybe another option would simply be to install a speed bump 50m or 100m back from the junction, on the minor road; break the consistency of the speed of the car so the cyclist should pop out of the blind spot.

That was covered on the video. Speed bumps cannot be installed in unlit areas. The cost of setting up public lighting and a viable supply seems to be prohibitive as well as light pollution in a heritage area

magicbastarder

cheers, it's been a good while since i watched it so i'd forgotten he'd covered that.

alentejo

Awful news about Ciaran Cannon. I hope he makes a speedy recovery!

I do find the circumstances of his accident scary.

I would consider myself a competent cyclist with up to now no serious knocks or injuries. I am sure Ciaran is an even more competent (and certainly fitter) cyclist than myself and for him to end up like that worries me about cycling risk in Ireland.

I really wish people would driver smaller less powerful cars. With the growth of car sizes and ever increasing performance of cars, I do think this needs to be challenged at an official level. If cars are going to clog up our cities for example, could smaller vehicles be pushed as far as policy makers are concerned?

In an ideal world, in my mind, drivers would be subject to driver retests every few years where issues about risk and other road risks could be asserted to some degree.

While cyclist safely is a somewhat complex issue to fully resolve, I do feel the idea that someone in there 20's for example, completes a driver theory test and a 40 minute driving test, they are them in the eyes of the law fully competent to drive unchallenged until they are 70 and only then they are required to have an eye test. I think being a driver should be more about privilege and in some sense should be more about continuous assessment to keep driving.

Rant over - Be careful out there

Weepsie

alentejo wrote: »

While cyclist safely is a somewhat complex issue to fully resolve, I do feel the idea that someone in there 20's for example, completes a driver theory test and a 40 minute driving test, they are them in the eyes of the law fully competent to drive unchallenged until they are 70 and only then they are required to have an eye test. I think being a driver should be more about privilege and in some sense should be more about continuous assessment to keep driving.

Rant over - Be careful out there

You have to do 12 hours of supervised driving too. Not that that's much, and to be honest it should be more but still

07Lapierre

alentejo wrote: »

While cyclist safely is a somewhat complex issue to fully resolve, I do feel the idea that someone in there 20's for example, completes a driver theory test and a 40 minute driving test, they are them in the eyes of the law fully competent to drive unchallenged until they are 70 and only then they are required to have an eye test. I think being a driver should be more about privilege and in some sense should be more about continuous assessment to keep driving.

Rant over - Be careful out there

When I passed my driving test my Dad said "Congratulations...you've now reached the bare minimum legal competency level to drive a car!"

magicbastarder

remember - approximately half of all car drivers are of below average intelligence.

Bass Reeves

magicbastarder wrote: »

remember - approximately half of all car drivers are of below average intelligence.

And at least half our cyclists as well, it might even be more

magicbastarder

research has proven that cyclists are more intelligent - and sexier - than the general population.

Bass Reeves

magicbastarder wrote: »

research has proven that cyclists are more intelligent - and sexier - than the general population.

Can you post a link please

magicbastarder

...it's around here somewhere

uphillonly

To add to the SUV love-in.

According the International Energy Agency SUVs were: "the second-largest contributor to the increase in global CO2 emissions since 2010 after the power sector"

They drive and handle exactly like they look, never understood the love for them. It's interesting how many motor journalists hate them as well for this point.

https://www.iea.org/commentaries/carbon-emissions-fell-across-all-sectors-in-2020-except-for-one-suvs

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidrvetter/2020/08/04/just-how-polluting-is-your-suv-this-new-campaign-might-shock-you/?sh=276cd4c22b13

Bass Reeves

Bass Reeves wrote: »

And at least half our cyclists as well, it might even be more

I think you're misunderstanding the meaning of average. By definition, half the cyclists are below and half are above average. That's literally what it means. You cannot have more than half below average, because then the average would shift.

Hurrache

uphillonly wrote: »

To add to the SUV love-in.

According the International Energy Agency SUVs were: "the second-largest contributor to the increase in global CO2 emissions since 2010 after the power sector"

They drive and handle exactly like they look, never understood the love for them. It's interesting how many motor journalists hate them as well for this point.

https://www.iea.org/commentaries/carbon-emissions-fell-across-all-sectors-in-2020-except-for-one-suvs

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidrvetter/2020/08/04/just-how-polluting-is-your-suv-this-new-campaign-might-shock-you/?sh=276cd4c22b13

It's a point I keep making, what's the definition of an SUV?

AndrewJRenko

Deleted User wrote: »

I think you're misunderstanding the meaning of average. By definition, half the cyclists are below and half are above average. That's literally what it means. You cannot have more than half below average, because then the average would shift.

It's been a long day........

magicbastarder

Deleted User wrote: »

I think you're misunderstanding the meaning of average. By definition, half the cyclists are below and half are above average. That's literally what it means. You cannot have more than half below average, because then the average would shift.

also, i think *you're* misunderstanding the meaning of average, because what you've just described is the median and not the average.

e.g. say you've five people, four of whom earn €10 per hour, and one of whom earns €60 per hour.
the average hourly wage is €20, but the median hourly wage is €10.
so 80% of our people earn below average.

FishOnABike

magicbastarder wrote: »

also, i think *you're* misunderstanding the meaning of average, because what you've just described is the median and not the average.

e.g. say you've five people, four of whom earn €10 per hour, and one of whom earns €60 per hour.
the average hourly wage is €20, but the median hourly wage is €10.
so 80% of our people earn below average.

Both median and mean are forms of average https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Average

From Ciaran's Facebook

Morning all. Just a short few words thank all of you for your very kind messages of encouragement over the weekend. I’m going home today, which is a very positive development. Sincere thanks also to all of the superb ambulance crew, nurses, doctors and hospital staff who have been brilliant in taking care of me. I’m facing a long road of rehab for my knee but at least I’m moving forward! Best wishes, C.

I don't envy his recovery path

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058198125/td-ciaran-cannon-hit-by-suv-suffers-serious-injury

A year to the day, after being knocked down, having surgery, recovery and all that entails.

https://twitter.com/ciarancannon/status/1543616175942369282?s=20&t=Pw2Oje6cgovfChyQyRzclw

I mean, I'd just be happy with being able to get on the bike, never mind a 500km spin (which I'd never be able to for anyway)