 |
 |
Which location (city, country) are we talking about when saying "Most infrastructure design has it completel the wrong way round" Thanks Kat Sent from my iPad > On 16 Sep 2015, at 07:35, Dave Holladay <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Simon > > Your pointers to Suchman and Paul Richards > > "Most infrastructure design has it completely the wrong way round - it is expected that ideal design (often copied from a manual ) will be occupied by more and more cyclists who will use it according to the rules." > > Gives a key detail to why CS2 cycle route at Bow is still fatally flawed in the way it is addressing the management of the risk of motor vehicle-cycle crashes > > and is a better way of expressing my comment on the core risk management system on which the system pins its safety credentials "To expect a reliable delivery of a reduction in the risk of a collision based on robust user compliance with traffic signals is supremely naieve" > > It becomes increasingly apparent that a reversion to the use of safety systems developed over a period of 2.3bn years may serve all road users better than a reliance most modern technologies > > Dave Holladay > >> On 16/09/2015 01:21, Simon P J Batterbury wrote: >> thanks for everybody's wishes. I'll be back. There was a full compliment of police and witnesses. >> >> following Paul Richards (anthropologist of technology or 'technography ') the problem with a pure 'infrastructure' approach to better cycling outcomes would be that it will undoubtedly be misused and adapted by local users, just as cyclists hop across kerbs at present or run the lights on great infrastructure, as they do in the Netherlands and other countries. he does not say 'perfect' technological design is impossible, only that design must recognise user behaviour much better. this is Durkheimian . this means doing those observational studies of junctions,and following cyclists about to see what they do.Also motorists. >> >> Most infrastructure design has it completel the wrong way round - it is expected that ideal design (often copied from a manual ) will be occupied by more and more cyclists who will use it according to the rules. >> >> >> referring to Suchman's work on photocpiers, whose users could not often master the buttons and the paper jams, Richards says " To remedy this situation photocopy designers wanted to change users. But Suchman tried to get the designers to accept that users were never going to operate the machine according to the book. What was needed was not to educate the users to fit the machine but to redesign the machine to respond to the way users use (or abuse) it." >> >> Richards, P. 2010. A Green Revolution from below? Retirement address, Wageningen University, the Netherlands. http://edepot.wur.nl/165231 >> >> >> >> Dr. Simon Batterbury | Associate Professor, Environmental Studies| Dept. of Geography | 221 Bouverie St (rm L2.33) | University of Melbourne, 3010 VIC, >> +61 (0)3 8344 9319 | simonpjb @ unimelb.edu.au | http://www.simonbatterbury.net >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Alan Munro [[log in to unmask]] >> Sent: Tuesday, 15 September 2015 10:12 PM >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: Re: / HGV fatals - Aggregation of Marginal Gains? >> >> My sympathy too! Simon, that sounds a horrific incident. I am glad it turned out with no serious, long term injury. >> >> I must admit to be very interested, as both a researcher and cyclist in non cycling-friendly bit of Yorkshire, for an equivalent of the British Cycling's Aggregation of Marginal Gains in terms of an aggregation of things which might bring to bear to make one safer on the road? If one doesn't know the term from cycling sport, it refers to an aggregation of competitive 'gains' through innovative training, frame design, psychological help, diet etc. >> >> In the sense I'm thinking, it would be 'aggregation of gains' of safety on the road through a mix of behaviours, dress, position on the road, technology, etc... >> >> In terms of myself - >> Certainly, I use the 'lifesaver' from a brief flirtation with motorcycling and have found it useful. >> I also keep a very good eye on car behaviour around me as I do not believe they will actually signal their intentions. >> I have gone through the debates of high-viz with other cycling activists and do actually wear brightly-coloured things if possible. I don't care if it's a cop-out in some eyes - it has recognisable 'gains' in visibility shown in rather basic visual perception experiments (and it's why ambulances and fire-engines are painted that way). >> We could add - lights during the day? Blinking lights? >> Road style? >> Junction behaviour? >> We might also bring in innovative technological solutions. I have a colleague who has been working on interesting novel drone ideas. >> >> It might be slightly different for rural cyclists - we have to bear in mind that a lot of accidents seem to happen in rural roads. >> >> I do think infrastructure and well-designed roads are the only real solution, as well as actual enforcement of laws for motorists, and campaign for these things, but these things do not seem to be arriving soon for the majority of cyclists. >> >> alan >> >> alan munro >> www.munrobius.com >> >> >>> On 15 Sep 2015, at 12:31, David Gordon Wilson wrote: >>> >>> My sympathy and congratulations on surviving! >>> >>> (I have been hit by nine motor vehicles in the US since coming here >>> from the UK). >>> >>> Dave Wilson >>> David Gordon (Dave) Wilson >>> MIT room 3-256, 77 Massachusetts Ave. >>> CAMBRIDGE, MA 02139-4307, USA >>> Phone: 617 253 5121; >>> Email: [log in to unmask]; OR >>> 21 Winthrop Street WINCHESTER MA 01890-2851, USA; Ph.: 781 729 2203; >>> Email: [log in to unmask] >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Simon P J Batterbury >>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>>> This is slightly raw since I am hospital after being hit on wednesday by an HGV doing 60km/h. Miraculously, after spinning through the air (the bike was destroyed under the wheels), I came out with broken ribs, delated lung, concussion and a broken leg. The accident circumstances were different ( I was at 90 degrees to the truck) and what saved me was wearing a backpack with a load of university papers and a laptop - these cushioned the blow and broke ribs , instead of worse. Doesn't safety advice say not to wear a backpack and to use panniers? I could have been dead or paralysed without it. >>>> The Lifesaver issue seems to ring true . also scannign the forward field of vision - that would have helped in my case. >>>> I am writing a cathartic blog posting and will post it, now that i am enjoying a painful but unexpected second lease of life. >>>> >>>> Dr. Simon Batterbury | Associate Professor, Environmental Studies| Dept. of Geography | 221 Bouverie St (rm L2.33) | University of Melbourne, 3010 VIC, >>>> +61 (0)3 8344 9319 | simonpjb @ unimelb.edu.au | http://www.simonbatterbury.net >>>> >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Dave Holladay [[log in to unmask]] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, 15 September 2015 7:59 AM >>>> To: [log in to unmask] >>>> Subject: Re: CSRG Manchester - Manchester new tram tracks / HGV fatals >>>> >>>> I've a meeting in Barnsley on Wednesday, and would like to drop by en >>>> route to catch up if that's OK. >>>> >>>> Would like to see how we can tie in some known detail which seems to >>>> correlate and point to further research. >>>> >>>> 1) at least 80% of HGV-cycle fatal crashes in London are initiated by an >>>> impact between the front nearside quarter of the HGV and the rear >>>> offside quarter of the cycle. >>>> >>>> 2) immediately prior to an impact in this area the cyclist will be in >>>> the position of least visibility from the driving position - viz masked >>>> by the nearside A pillar, (ironically) the cluster of external mirrors >>>> placed to remove the blind spots across the front and down to the rear >>>> and side of the truck, and the entire solid panelled front nearside >>>> corner and door of the truck. >>>> >>>> 3) there are indications that the cyclists are also unaware of the >>>> approaching truck because they do not maintain good all round >>>> observation by both aural and visual checks, especially the rearward >>>> over the right shoulder visual check, which is known by motorcyclists as >>>> the Lifesaver - which pretty bluntly tells you why you need to keep >>>> doing this in busy traffic. >>>> >>>> 4) 10 years ago a robust 5000 response survey of cyclists clearly >>>> highlighted 2 points >>>> i) female respondents answered that they