Redways question

Clive George said:

Have been having a jolly over in another place about cycle lanes and
why they are bad. I mentioned John Franklin's redways studies as the
set text on why they don't work, and people are querying the rates by
querying the miles travelled assumptions. Can anybody help here?

I'd have to read again to clarify the miles travelled assumptions, but the
comment in the referenced post, about splitting the roads into two
categories, is something that I had noticed and felt was somewhat suspect.

--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk

"Wally" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Clive George said:

Have been having a jolly over in another place about cycle lanes and
why they are bad. I mentioned John Franklin's redways studies as the
set text on why they don't work, and people are querying the rates by
querying the miles travelled assumptions. Can anybody help here?

I'd have to read again to clarify the miles travelled assumptions, but the
comment in the referenced post, about splitting the roads into two
categories, is something that I had noticed and felt was somewhat suspect.

That one doesn't seem suspect at all - all the figures in that table (3
rows, 2 columns) are per x thousand miles, so splitting the figures for
roads doesn't make any difference. Combine them, which a simple average will
do, and you end up with the same answer.

cheers,
clive

Wally said:

Clive George said:

Have been having a jolly over in another place about cycle lanes and
why they are bad. I mentioned John Franklin's redways studies as the
set text on why they don't work, and people are querying the rates by
querying the miles travelled assumptions. Can anybody help here?

I'd have to read again to clarify the miles travelled assumptions, but the
comment in the referenced post, about splitting the roads into two
categories, is something that I had noticed and felt was somewhat suspect.

--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk

What mileage assumption? I had a quick glance at Franklin's paper and
as far as I can see Franklin simply is quoting a survey. It is the
poster (over there) who is making assumptions. Clive says:
Having lived here and used both roads and redways
extensively
for over 10 years, I can tell you that this is just
bollocks.
At a guess, I'd say 90% of the cyclists are on the redway.

Well one might say that his guess is bollocks 🙂 As soon as he comes up
with some good figures on cycle use in MK that contradict the figures
quoted in Ref 4 then it is time to talk.

The road split seems reasonable for a traffic engineering magazine.

What is interesting is that the injury accident rate is roughly the
same for Redways and roads (166 to 180) or a .92 ratio which is _not_
good for a "safer" route for cycling. And the accident ratio is 1.63.
Roughly 48% vs 52% And this does not consider Franklin's point that
there probably is underreporting on the Redways.

I can see it now: Use the Redways you may even be a little wee bit
safer than on the road. Oh you probably will have more accidents (but
they won't hurt). And this does not consider Franklin's point that
there probably is underreporting on the Redways.

John Kane, Kingston O Canada

John_Kane said:

At a guess, I'd say 90% of the cyclists are on the redway.

Is that all? My guess was 99% when I was last there in 1987. I felt like
a freak for cycling on the roads at all. So few people cycled on the
roads that comparisons between road and Redway cycle accidents within MK
would have been meaningless because of the too-small sample size.

~PB