D
A
Alan Braggins
Guest
In article <[email protected]>, Ian Smith wrote:
>
>Your wife unexpected goes into labour early, with fairly regular
>contractions immediately, at 2:30am when public transport is not
>available where you reside. You'd decide to cycle to the hospital,
>or maybe just email them to send a monitor?
It was about 6.30am, and I phoned them to send an ambulance.
My son was born before the ambulance (or midwife, or doctor)
arrived, on the bathroom floor - which I'm fairly convinced
was an improvement on being born in the freezing cold car,
which he would have been had I tried driving to the hospital
as originally planned.
>
>Your wife unexpected goes into labour early, with fairly regular
>contractions immediately, at 2:30am when public transport is not
>available where you reside. You'd decide to cycle to the hospital,
>or maybe just email them to send a monitor?
It was about 6.30am, and I phoned them to send an ambulance.
My son was born before the ambulance (or midwife, or doctor)
arrived, on the bathroom floor - which I'm fairly convinced
was an improvement on being born in the freezing cold car,
which he would have been had I tried driving to the hospital
as originally planned.
A
Alistair Gunn
Guest
Daniel Barlow twisted the electrons to say:
> Ian Smith wrote:
> > There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
> That's still not more than one per family per mine months, though ;-)
More realistically, one per family per year ... Unless you're into
either bigamy or polygamy that is (and have something of an interest in
mass production!).
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...
> Ian Smith wrote:
> > There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
> That's still not more than one per family per mine months, though ;-)
More realistically, one per family per year ... Unless you're into
either bigamy or polygamy that is (and have something of an interest in
mass production!).
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...
G
Matt B wrote:
>
> Taxi services, especially if they are "private hire", are essentially
> extremely inefficient uses of "private cars". There is much mileage
> done going to collect, or returning from dropping off passengers, which
> does not really happen with "normal" private car use.
>
So taking the kids to school and then driving back empty, then driving
back to the school to fetch the kids doesn't involve 50% unnecessary
journeys (assuming the rest is necessary)
Or driving to the supermarket is "necessary" because you need the car
to get the shopping home but cycling/walking to the supermarket and
then getting a taxi home involves unnecessary taxi mileage.
And around my house at least we could put in two six foot wide
mandatory cycle lanes on nearly every road with no inconvenience to
motorists if all the people with "efficient" private cars used
"inefficient" taxis (and it would be possible for people to get past
them while they were unloaded rather than the current situation where
cars just stop in the middle of the road and then desparately try to
unload them as quickly as possible before going to find a parking space
that can be half as far away[1] as the nearest supermarket is. And you
wouldn't get the 5-10 car long queue at 06:15 that has been stuck
behind the dustbin lorry where there is literally nowhere on the entire
length of the road where a car can get past)
Tim.
[1] OK, slight exaggeration - somewhere between a quarter and a third.
>
> Taxi services, especially if they are "private hire", are essentially
> extremely inefficient uses of "private cars". There is much mileage
> done going to collect, or returning from dropping off passengers, which
> does not really happen with "normal" private car use.
>
So taking the kids to school and then driving back empty, then driving
back to the school to fetch the kids doesn't involve 50% unnecessary
journeys (assuming the rest is necessary)
Or driving to the supermarket is "necessary" because you need the car
to get the shopping home but cycling/walking to the supermarket and
then getting a taxi home involves unnecessary taxi mileage.
And around my house at least we could put in two six foot wide
mandatory cycle lanes on nearly every road with no inconvenience to
motorists if all the people with "efficient" private cars used
"inefficient" taxis (and it would be possible for people to get past
them while they were unloaded rather than the current situation where
cars just stop in the middle of the road and then desparately try to
unload them as quickly as possible before going to find a parking space
that can be half as far away[1] as the nearest supermarket is. And you
wouldn't get the 5-10 car long queue at 06:15 that has been stuck
behind the dustbin lorry where there is literally nowhere on the entire
length of the road where a car can get past)
Tim.
[1] OK, slight exaggeration - somewhere between a quarter and a third.
M
Matt B
Guest
[email protected] wrote:
> Matt B wrote:
>> Taxi services, especially if they are "private hire", are essentially
>> extremely inefficient uses of "private cars". There is much mileage
>> done going to collect, or returning from dropping off passengers, which
>> does not really happen with "normal" private car use.
>>
>
> So taking the kids to school and then driving back empty, then driving
> back to the school to fetch the kids doesn't involve 50% unnecessary
> journeys (assuming the rest is necessary)
Like I said, taxi services are inefficient.
> Or driving to the supermarket is "necessary" because you need the car
> to get the shopping home but cycling/walking to the supermarket and
> then getting a taxi home involves unnecessary taxi mileage.
What's the difference? The taxi would probably travel there empty too.
It /is/ inefficient do do a two-way motor journey when only one-way is
productive.
> And around my house at least we could put in two six foot wide
> mandatory cycle lanes on nearly every road with no inconvenience to
> motorists if all the people with "efficient" private cars used
> "inefficient" taxis
That's a different issue. Roads are not being used efficiently if they
are being used for vehicle storage. It doesn't alter the efficiency of
taxis either, they /are/ inefficient.
> (and it would be possible for people to get past
> them while they were unloaded rather than the current situation where
> cars just stop in the middle of the road and then desparately try to
> unload them as quickly as possible before going to find a parking space
> that can be half as far away[1] as the nearest supermarket is.
Vehicle storage, yes, it's a crazy way to use roads, I agree.
> And you
> wouldn't get the 5-10 car long queue at 06:15 that has been stuck
> behind the dustbin lorry where there is literally nowhere on the entire
> length of the road where a car can get past)
The thing is, councils have too much incentive to encourage this waste
of road space, so they do.
--
Matt B
> Matt B wrote:
>> Taxi services, especially if they are "private hire", are essentially
>> extremely inefficient uses of "private cars". There is much mileage
>> done going to collect, or returning from dropping off passengers, which
>> does not really happen with "normal" private car use.
>>
>
> So taking the kids to school and then driving back empty, then driving
> back to the school to fetch the kids doesn't involve 50% unnecessary
> journeys (assuming the rest is necessary)
Like I said, taxi services are inefficient.
> Or driving to the supermarket is "necessary" because you need the car
> to get the shopping home but cycling/walking to the supermarket and
> then getting a taxi home involves unnecessary taxi mileage.
What's the difference? The taxi would probably travel there empty too.
It /is/ inefficient do do a two-way motor journey when only one-way is
productive.
> And around my house at least we could put in two six foot wide
> mandatory cycle lanes on nearly every road with no inconvenience to
> motorists if all the people with "efficient" private cars used
> "inefficient" taxis
That's a different issue. Roads are not being used efficiently if they
are being used for vehicle storage. It doesn't alter the efficiency of
taxis either, they /are/ inefficient.
> (and it would be possible for people to get past
> them while they were unloaded rather than the current situation where
> cars just stop in the middle of the road and then desparately try to
> unload them as quickly as possible before going to find a parking space
> that can be half as far away[1] as the nearest supermarket is.
Vehicle storage, yes, it's a crazy way to use roads, I agree.
> And you
> wouldn't get the 5-10 car long queue at 06:15 that has been stuck
> behind the dustbin lorry where there is literally nowhere on the entire
> length of the road where a car can get past)
The thing is, councils have too much incentive to encourage this waste
of road space, so they do.
--
Matt B
S
Simon Brooke
Guest
in message <[email protected]>, Ian Smith
('[email protected]') wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 08:18:49 +0100, Simon Brooke <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> in message <[email protected]>, Adam Lea
>> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>>
>> > Please don't try to convince me that every single car journey made
>> > every day in the UK couldn't possibly be made feasibly by another
>> > method, because I won't believe you.
>>
>> Please don't tell me that /any/ given car journey couldn't be made by
>> any other means,
>
> Your wife unexpected goes into labour early, with fairly regular
> contractions immediately, at 2:30am when public transport is not
> available where you reside. You'd decide to cycle to the hospital,
> or maybe just email them to send a monitor?
80+% of children in Western Europe are born at home.
> There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
Name one.
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
The Conservative Party now has the support of a smaller proportion of
the electorate in Scotland than Sinn Fein have in Northern Ireland.
('[email protected]') wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 08:18:49 +0100, Simon Brooke <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> in message <[email protected]>, Adam Lea
>> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>>
>> > Please don't try to convince me that every single car journey made
>> > every day in the UK couldn't possibly be made feasibly by another
>> > method, because I won't believe you.
>>
>> Please don't tell me that /any/ given car journey couldn't be made by
>> any other means,
>
> Your wife unexpected goes into labour early, with fairly regular
> contractions immediately, at 2:30am when public transport is not
> available where you reside. You'd decide to cycle to the hospital,
> or maybe just email them to send a monitor?
80+% of children in Western Europe are born at home.
> There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
Name one.
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
The Conservative Party now has the support of a smaller proportion of
the electorate in Scotland than Sinn Fein have in Northern Ireland.
T
Tom Crispin
Guest
On 18 Oct 2006 15:33:33 +0100 (BST), [email protected] (Alan
Braggins) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, Ian Smith wrote:
>>
>>Your wife unexpected goes into labour early, with fairly regular
>>contractions immediately, at 2:30am when public transport is not
>>available where you reside. You'd decide to cycle to the hospital,
>>or maybe just email them to send a monitor?
>
>It was about 6.30am, and I phoned them to send an ambulance.
>My son was born before the ambulance (or midwife, or doctor)
>arrived, on the bathroom floor - which I'm fairly convinced
>was an improvement on being born in the freezing cold car,
>which he would have been had I tried driving to the hospital
>as originally planned.
A friend of mine delivered his son in his car. He said that it made a
hell of a mess on the upholstery.
Braggins) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, Ian Smith wrote:
>>
>>Your wife unexpected goes into labour early, with fairly regular
>>contractions immediately, at 2:30am when public transport is not
>>available where you reside. You'd decide to cycle to the hospital,
>>or maybe just email them to send a monitor?
>
>It was about 6.30am, and I phoned them to send an ambulance.
>My son was born before the ambulance (or midwife, or doctor)
>arrived, on the bathroom floor - which I'm fairly convinced
>was an improvement on being born in the freezing cold car,
>which he would have been had I tried driving to the hospital
>as originally planned.
A friend of mine delivered his son in his car. He said that it made a
hell of a mess on the upholstery.
C
Clive George
Guest
"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
>
> Name one.
Given time constraints, that's actually very easy.
cheers,
clive
news:[email protected]...
>> There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
>
> Name one.
Given time constraints, that's actually very easy.
cheers,
clive
I
Ian Smith
Guest
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:
> in message <[email protected]>, Ian Smith
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
> > There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
>
> Name one.
I just did. You chose to ignore it. Your observation that some
children are born at home is fatuous - it does not mean it is prudent
for all children to be born at home (my first daughter was born in
hospital and due to complications my wife was rushed immediately to
theatre after delivery, my second daughter was a complicated
pregnancy, and delivery remote from an operating theatre was not
considered prudent, tyhough as it happened that time medical staff did
not have cause to break into a run and start crashing through doors).
Here's another: Surrey to Edinburgh with a prototype stressing jig
that is too heavy to be carried by one person, does not fit within
airline baggage allowances and is needed there tomorrow. It does,
however, fit in teh back of an estate car.
How about Edinburgh to Telford with a load of bridge inspection and
survey equipment. To be completed within a defined 12 hour slot in
order to comply with working time regulations while meeting the
deadlines imposed by pre-booked railway possessions.
regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
> in message <[email protected]>, Ian Smith
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
> > There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
>
> Name one.
I just did. You chose to ignore it. Your observation that some
children are born at home is fatuous - it does not mean it is prudent
for all children to be born at home (my first daughter was born in
hospital and due to complications my wife was rushed immediately to
theatre after delivery, my second daughter was a complicated
pregnancy, and delivery remote from an operating theatre was not
considered prudent, tyhough as it happened that time medical staff did
not have cause to break into a run and start crashing through doors).
Here's another: Surrey to Edinburgh with a prototype stressing jig
that is too heavy to be carried by one person, does not fit within
airline baggage allowances and is needed there tomorrow. It does,
however, fit in teh back of an estate car.
How about Edinburgh to Telford with a load of bridge inspection and
survey equipment. To be completed within a defined 12 hour slot in
order to comply with working time regulations while meeting the
deadlines imposed by pre-booked railway possessions.
regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
T
Tony Raven
Guest
Simon Brooke wrote on 18/10/2006 17:50 +0100:
> in message <[email protected]>, Ian Smith
>
>> There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
>
> Name one.
>
By definition car journeys can only be made by car ;-)
--
Tony
"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci
> in message <[email protected]>, Ian Smith
>
>> There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
>
> Name one.
>
By definition car journeys can only be made by car ;-)
--
Tony
"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci
S
Squashme
Guest
Matt B wrote:
> Squashme wrote:
> > DavidR wrote:
> >> "Matt B" <[email protected]> wrote
> >>
> >> A road with no pedestrian casualties does not mean it is safe for
> >> pedestrians to use. Similarly, road with high casualties doesn't mean it is
> >> unusually dangerous. Unless population figures are
> >> included.vehicle-distance is totally meaningless
> >
> > Don't tell him that. I want him to believe that it's perfectly safe for
> > him to go play on the road amongst the cars, but that he must run and
> > hide to save his life whenever a bicycle appears.
>
> Do you think it /could/ be safe to play amongst cars on our streets?
> Would /you/ like it to be safe to so do? Do you think our road system
> is designed to give equal priority to all users, or is one particular
> user category given de facto priority, and the others have to wait their
> turn? Do you agree with the current road priority pecking order? Do
> you support the use of traffic lights, signs, and regulations?
Firefly: Well, that covers a lot of ground. Say, you cover a lot of
ground yourself. You'd better beat it, I hear they're going to put up
an office building where you're standing. You can leave in a taxi. If
you can't get a taxi, you can leave in a huff. If that's too soon, you
can leave in a minute and a huff. You know, you haven't stopped talking
since I came here. You must have been vaccinated with a phonograph
needle.
(Groucho delivers the above lines at what seems like 10 words a second.)
> Squashme wrote:
> > DavidR wrote:
> >> "Matt B" <[email protected]> wrote
> >>
> >> A road with no pedestrian casualties does not mean it is safe for
> >> pedestrians to use. Similarly, road with high casualties doesn't mean it is
> >> unusually dangerous. Unless population figures are
> >> included.vehicle-distance is totally meaningless
> >
> > Don't tell him that. I want him to believe that it's perfectly safe for
> > him to go play on the road amongst the cars, but that he must run and
> > hide to save his life whenever a bicycle appears.
>
> Do you think it /could/ be safe to play amongst cars on our streets?
> Would /you/ like it to be safe to so do? Do you think our road system
> is designed to give equal priority to all users, or is one particular
> user category given de facto priority, and the others have to wait their
> turn? Do you agree with the current road priority pecking order? Do
> you support the use of traffic lights, signs, and regulations?
Firefly: Well, that covers a lot of ground. Say, you cover a lot of
ground yourself. You'd better beat it, I hear they're going to put up
an office building where you're standing. You can leave in a taxi. If
you can't get a taxi, you can leave in a huff. If that's too soon, you
can leave in a minute and a huff. You know, you haven't stopped talking
since I came here. You must have been vaccinated with a phonograph
needle.
(Groucho delivers the above lines at what seems like 10 words a second.)
S
Simon Brooke
Guest
in message <[email protected]>, Tom Crispin
('[email protected]') wrote:
> On 18 Oct 2006 15:33:33 +0100 (BST), [email protected] (Alan
> Braggins) wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>, Ian Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>Your wife unexpected goes into labour early, with fairly regular
>>>contractions immediately, at 2:30am when public transport is not
>>>available where you reside. You'd decide to cycle to the hospital,
>>>or maybe just email them to send a monitor?
>>
>>It was about 6.30am, and I phoned them to send an ambulance.
>>My son was born before the ambulance (or midwife, or doctor)
>>arrived, on the bathroom floor - which I'm fairly convinced
>>was an improvement on being born in the freezing cold car,
>>which he would have been had I tried driving to the hospital
>>as originally planned.
>
> A friend of mine delivered his son in his car. He said that it made a
> hell of a mess on the upholstery.
Yes, one of my wife's nephews was delivered similarly. I can't help
thinking home would have been both more comfortable and safer.
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; This email may contain confidential or otherwise privileged
;; information, though, quite frankly, if you're not the intended
;; recipient and you've got nothing better to do than read other
;; folks' emails then I'm glad to have brightened up your sad little
;; life a tiny bit.
('[email protected]') wrote:
> On 18 Oct 2006 15:33:33 +0100 (BST), [email protected] (Alan
> Braggins) wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>, Ian Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>Your wife unexpected goes into labour early, with fairly regular
>>>contractions immediately, at 2:30am when public transport is not
>>>available where you reside. You'd decide to cycle to the hospital,
>>>or maybe just email them to send a monitor?
>>
>>It was about 6.30am, and I phoned them to send an ambulance.
>>My son was born before the ambulance (or midwife, or doctor)
>>arrived, on the bathroom floor - which I'm fairly convinced
>>was an improvement on being born in the freezing cold car,
>>which he would have been had I tried driving to the hospital
>>as originally planned.
>
> A friend of mine delivered his son in his car. He said that it made a
> hell of a mess on the upholstery.
Yes, one of my wife's nephews was delivered similarly. I can't help
thinking home would have been both more comfortable and safer.
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; This email may contain confidential or otherwise privileged
;; information, though, quite frankly, if you're not the intended
;; recipient and you've got nothing better to do than read other
;; folks' emails then I'm glad to have brightened up your sad little
;; life a tiny bit.
S
Simon Brooke
Guest
in message <[email protected]>, Ian Smith
('[email protected]') wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:
>> in message <[email protected]>, Ian Smith
>> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>>
>> > There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
>>
>> Name one.
>
> I just did. You chose to ignore it.
I'm unpersuaded by it.
> Here's another: Surrey to Edinburgh with a prototype stressing jig
> that is too heavy to be carried by one person, does not fit within
> airline baggage allowances and is needed there tomorrow. It does,
> however, fit in teh back of an estate car.
Or a train.
> How about Edinburgh to Telford with a load of bridge inspection and
> survey equipment. To be completed within a defined 12 hour slot in
> order to comply with working time regulations while meeting the
> deadlines imposed by pre-booked railway possessions.
Sack your manager, he's clearly incompetent. If he allows jobs to be booked
out under that sort of time-pressure, what happens if there's thick fog?
Do you drive dangerously, or do you fail to deliver your contract?
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; Skill without imagination is craftsmanship and gives us
;; many useful objects such as wickerwork picnic baskets.
;; Imagination without skill gives us modern art.
;; Tom Stoppard, Artist Descending A Staircase
('[email protected]') wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:
>> in message <[email protected]>, Ian Smith
>> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>>
>> > There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
>>
>> Name one.
>
> I just did. You chose to ignore it.
I'm unpersuaded by it.
> Here's another: Surrey to Edinburgh with a prototype stressing jig
> that is too heavy to be carried by one person, does not fit within
> airline baggage allowances and is needed there tomorrow. It does,
> however, fit in teh back of an estate car.
Or a train.
> How about Edinburgh to Telford with a load of bridge inspection and
> survey equipment. To be completed within a defined 12 hour slot in
> order to comply with working time regulations while meeting the
> deadlines imposed by pre-booked railway possessions.
Sack your manager, he's clearly incompetent. If he allows jobs to be booked
out under that sort of time-pressure, what happens if there's thick fog?
Do you drive dangerously, or do you fail to deliver your contract?
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; Skill without imagination is craftsmanship and gives us
;; many useful objects such as wickerwork picnic baskets.
;; Imagination without skill gives us modern art.
;; Tom Stoppard, Artist Descending A Staircase
D
DavidR
Guest
"Matt B" <[email protected]> wrote
> DavidR wrote:
>> "Matt B" <[email protected]> wrote
>>> spindrift wrote:
>>>
>>> It hardly shows cyclists in a good light, safety wise, compared to
>>> motorists, does it.
>>>
>>>> Figures covering the years 2001-05, provided to CTC by TfL (on the day
>>>> that "Share the Road" was launched), show that a pedestrian in London
>>>> is over 100 times more likely to be injured in collision with a motor
>>>> vehicle than a cycle.
>>> Given that motor vehicles do about 125 times as many vehicle kilometres
>>> as bikes do (RCGB), that suggests that bikes injure 25% more
>>> pedestrians
>>> per vehicle kilometre than motor vehicles do.
>>
>> So people keep saying. Except they are not *equivalent* kilometres.
>
> 1km = 1km.
1km with few pedestrians != 1km with lots of pedestrians.
>> If you counter by saying that the pedestrian casualty rate is the same
per
>> vehicle kilometre on motorways as towns, think of the proportion of
>> pedestrians that are NOT harmed on motorways compared to towns.
>
> You have a good point, similar to the one I've been accused (by many
> here) of trolling over for years. If we can provide motorways for all
> motor vehicle (cars, trucks, and buses) inter-city journeys our A, B, C,
> and D roads, and our urban streets, will be a whole lot safer for
> cyclists, pedestrians, equestrians, and local motor traffic (and less
> congested).
Not necessarily. Snarl ups are good for road safety.
The French publish a good breakdown of casualties by department. I don't
know if there is a British equivalent but it illustrates the point of
"non-equivalent" km very well. Where are road users at greater risk? In the
dense urban areas or the open countryside?
In central Paris, the distance travelled by vehicles is just 86m km per
pedestrian fatality. In Haute Corse it is 340m km. Both are below national
average of 460m km/fatal.
So Paris is pretty awful isn't it?
Or is it?
Now, consider it in population terms. In Paris, there are 15 ped fatals
per 1m head of population (which is near the national average). In Haute
Corse there where 21 per 1m head in 2001 and 42 in 2002 (but given the
totals were 3 and 6, we can forgive such a statistical blip).
Of the 20 most densely populated departments in 2001, 14 were below
national average. Of the 20 least dense departments, 12 were above national
average. Although three of those departments recorded no casualties in
2002, the pattern was similar to the year before.
If you were a French traffic engineer considering pedestrian safety by
vehicle distance alone you would be out by a factor of 10.
On a related note, the stats also seem to show that injuries to vehicle
occupants are not distance related either. Only occupant fatals show a
link.
> DavidR wrote:
>> "Matt B" <[email protected]> wrote
>>> spindrift wrote:
>>>
>>> It hardly shows cyclists in a good light, safety wise, compared to
>>> motorists, does it.
>>>
>>>> Figures covering the years 2001-05, provided to CTC by TfL (on the day
>>>> that "Share the Road" was launched), show that a pedestrian in London
>>>> is over 100 times more likely to be injured in collision with a motor
>>>> vehicle than a cycle.
>>> Given that motor vehicles do about 125 times as many vehicle kilometres
>>> as bikes do (RCGB), that suggests that bikes injure 25% more
>>> pedestrians
>>> per vehicle kilometre than motor vehicles do.
>>
>> So people keep saying. Except they are not *equivalent* kilometres.
>
> 1km = 1km.
1km with few pedestrians != 1km with lots of pedestrians.
>> If you counter by saying that the pedestrian casualty rate is the same
per
>> vehicle kilometre on motorways as towns, think of the proportion of
>> pedestrians that are NOT harmed on motorways compared to towns.
>
> You have a good point, similar to the one I've been accused (by many
> here) of trolling over for years. If we can provide motorways for all
> motor vehicle (cars, trucks, and buses) inter-city journeys our A, B, C,
> and D roads, and our urban streets, will be a whole lot safer for
> cyclists, pedestrians, equestrians, and local motor traffic (and less
> congested).
Not necessarily. Snarl ups are good for road safety.
The French publish a good breakdown of casualties by department. I don't
know if there is a British equivalent but it illustrates the point of
"non-equivalent" km very well. Where are road users at greater risk? In the
dense urban areas or the open countryside?
In central Paris, the distance travelled by vehicles is just 86m km per
pedestrian fatality. In Haute Corse it is 340m km. Both are below national
average of 460m km/fatal.
So Paris is pretty awful isn't it?
Or is it?
Now, consider it in population terms. In Paris, there are 15 ped fatals
per 1m head of population (which is near the national average). In Haute
Corse there where 21 per 1m head in 2001 and 42 in 2002 (but given the
totals were 3 and 6, we can forgive such a statistical blip).
Of the 20 most densely populated departments in 2001, 14 were below
national average. Of the 20 least dense departments, 12 were above national
average. Although three of those departments recorded no casualties in
2002, the pattern was similar to the year before.
If you were a French traffic engineer considering pedestrian safety by
vehicle distance alone you would be out by a factor of 10.
On a related note, the stats also seem to show that injuries to vehicle
occupants are not distance related either. Only occupant fatals show a
link.
A
Adam Lea
Guest
"Matt B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Why should we dictate how people travel?
I never said anyhing about dictating how people travel. But if you are going
to engage in lifestyle choices that have the most negative side effects on
other people/environment/society then you should not complain about either
having to pay for the consequences of those side effects and/or having the
poeple negatively affected discourage you from these choices.
It is called taking responsibility for your actions.
news:[email protected]...
>
> Why should we dictate how people travel?
I never said anyhing about dictating how people travel. But if you are going
to engage in lifestyle choices that have the most negative side effects on
other people/environment/society then you should not complain about either
having to pay for the consequences of those side effects and/or having the
poeple negatively affected discourage you from these choices.
It is called taking responsibility for your actions.
A
Adam Lea
Guest
"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news
[email protected]...
> in message <[email protected]>, Adam Lea
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> "Matt B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> Motorists don't snarl up towns for pleasure, it is usually because there
>>> is no alternative for the journey they are attempting to make.
>>
>> Or because they are too bone idle to look for an alternative.
>>
>> Please don't try to convince me that every single car journey made every
>> day in the UK couldn't possibly be made feasibly by another method,
>> because I won't believe you.
>
> Please don't tell me that /any/ given car journey couldn't be made by any
> other means, where, at least seven times out of ten, that other means
> includes 'the telephone' or 'the internet'. There really is no point in
> moving physical people to centralised locations to work on information
> which could far more easily and cheaply be moved to them. Our children are
> going to look back on commuting with disbelief and incomprehension: no-one
> could possibly believe it made economic sense. They'll be right, of
> course.
>
> And if you got rid of all the pointless commuting, the roads of our cities
> would be clear for the journeys which actually do have to be made.
>
Two problems with that:
1. Flaky technology
2. Social isolation
Having said that, I do agree with the general idea.
news
[email protected]...> in message <[email protected]>, Adam Lea
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> "Matt B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> Motorists don't snarl up towns for pleasure, it is usually because there
>>> is no alternative for the journey they are attempting to make.
>>
>> Or because they are too bone idle to look for an alternative.
>>
>> Please don't try to convince me that every single car journey made every
>> day in the UK couldn't possibly be made feasibly by another method,
>> because I won't believe you.
>
> Please don't tell me that /any/ given car journey couldn't be made by any
> other means, where, at least seven times out of ten, that other means
> includes 'the telephone' or 'the internet'. There really is no point in
> moving physical people to centralised locations to work on information
> which could far more easily and cheaply be moved to them. Our children are
> going to look back on commuting with disbelief and incomprehension: no-one
> could possibly believe it made economic sense. They'll be right, of
> course.
>
> And if you got rid of all the pointless commuting, the roads of our cities
> would be clear for the journeys which actually do have to be made.
>
Two problems with that:
1. Flaky technology
2. Social isolation
Having said that, I do agree with the general idea.
A
Adam Lea
Guest
"Matt B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Those are all created by supply not meeting the demand. The fault is with
> the supplier, not the user. If your internet is slow you complain to your
> ISP, not demand your neighbour use it less, and only when absolutely
> essential.
>
Do you? If the internet is slow due to high usage I usually try again during
quieter periods, just like if I am travelling long distance I try to avoid
using the car at peak times.
news:[email protected]...
>
> Those are all created by supply not meeting the demand. The fault is with
> the supplier, not the user. If your internet is slow you complain to your
> ISP, not demand your neighbour use it less, and only when absolutely
> essential.
>
Do you? If the internet is slow due to high usage I usually try again during
quieter periods, just like if I am travelling long distance I try to avoid
using the car at peak times.
A
Adam Lea
Guest
"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> in message <[email protected]>, Ian Smith
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
>
> Name one.
>
My bridge partner has two artificial knees, is registered disabled and
cannot walk more than a few hundred yards. I would say most of his car
journeys couldn't be made by another method, unless another method includes
getting a lift from another motorist.
news:[email protected]...
> in message <[email protected]>, Ian Smith
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
>
> Name one.
>
My bridge partner has two artificial knees, is registered disabled and
cannot walk more than a few hundred yards. I would say most of his car
journeys couldn't be made by another method, unless another method includes
getting a lift from another motorist.
J
John B
Guest
Adam Lea wrote:
> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > in message <[email protected]>, Ian Smith
> > ('[email protected]') wrote:
> >
> >> There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
> >
> > Name one.
> >
>
> My bridge partner has two artificial knees, is registered disabled and
> cannot walk more than a few hundred yards. I would say most of his car
> journeys couldn't be made by another method, unless another method includes
> getting a lift from another motorist.
Would a hand-cranked cycle be a possibility?
John B
> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > in message <[email protected]>, Ian Smith
> > ('[email protected]') wrote:
> >
> >> There are lots of car journeys that can't be made by other means.
> >
> > Name one.
> >
>
> My bridge partner has two artificial knees, is registered disabled and
> cannot walk more than a few hundred yards. I would say most of his car
> journeys couldn't be made by another method, unless another method includes
> getting a lift from another motorist.
Would a hand-cranked cycle be a possibility?
John B
T
Tony Raven
Guest
Adam Lea wrote on 20/10/2006 22:45 +0100:
>
> My bridge partner has two artificial knees, is registered disabled and
> cannot walk more than a few hundred yards.
Artificial knees are not in themselves a disability or limit to walking.
There must be some other problem
--
Tony
"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci
>
> My bridge partner has two artificial knees, is registered disabled and
> cannot walk more than a few hundred yards.
Artificial knees are not in themselves a disability or limit to walking.
There must be some other problem
--
Tony
"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci
