[Daveyraveygravey]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-59477788

The report just gives statistics, it doesn’t give any explanation as far as I can tell.  As someone that chooses rural roads wherever possible, I’m a bit baffled by this.

Do drivers take more risks because they are “out of the way” or there are less witnesses?  Why would quieter roads cause more accidents?

Topic

[Cycloid]

ROSPA  summed up the

ROSPA  summed up the situation a few years ago:-

Most accidents happen on urban roads, because that is where most cycling takes place.
Accidents on rural roads are more serious because speeds are higher.

The balance may have changed  during lockdowns, but I still think that is a basic truth

[lonpfrb]

hirsute wrote:

hirsute wrote:

Extra long horse whip?

1.5m white plastic tube for good visibility. Less impressive but more noticeable…

[Hirsute]

“trial of equipment”

“trial of equipment”

Extra long horse whip?

 

[lonpfrb]

PRSboy wrote:

PRSboy wrote:

Because a bicycle is unlikely to kick your car door in, unlike a horse.  Perhaps therein lies a possible deterrent.

I’m delighted to live and ride in Horse country, observing the BHS/BC guidelines.

I’ve also been conducting a trial of equipment to assist drivers to judge what 1.5 metre separation looks like to avoid errors that are unsafe and do not comply with the forthcoming Highway Code. So far so good….

[Captain Badger]

ktache wrote:

NSL, mate…

Well that’s ok then

[ktache]

NSL, mate…

NSL, mate…

[Rendel Harris]

That’s an interesting thought

That’s an interesting thought, yes, quite possibly that might be the case.

[IanMSpencer]

I always give a motorist who
I always give a motorist who has slowed down or stopped for one of those motorists a big cheery thank you wave, to acknowledge their careful driving and also to acknowledge their actions have saved our overtaker from taking the soft option – us.

[Velophaart_95]

Most people don’t do this –

Most people don’t do this – they drive the same whatever the road, conditions, weather.

As soon as you lose ‘the view’ you need to slow down….. How many people actually do this? 

[PRSboy]

brooksby wrote:

chrisonatrike wrote:

I understand the horse bit but why can you zoom past, hoot and rev around cyclists and motorcyclists?

Just cyclists, innit?

Because a bicycle is unlikely to kick your car door in, unlike a horse.  Perhaps therein lies a possible deterrent.

[PRSboy]

hirsute wrote:

IanMSpencer wrote:

 

The real test is: would they like to meet themselves coming the other way? Would you?

 

I don’t think that question arises for most drivers.

The answer is… “I had to go on the wrong side of the road to overtake the cyclist.  They are so dangerous.”

I had an incident a while ago, where a driver pulled out to overtake our little group when there was a car coming, yet just kept going.  The other driver stopped to give her space to pull back in.  I put it down a momentary poor judgement until she did the exact same thing again shortly afterwards when somehow she ended up behind us again.  Looking into the car I saw her face and it was like looking at a zombie.  It was the sort of look pigeons give you while they sit in the middle of the road pecking gravel.

[andystow]

Rendel Harris wrote:

Rendel Harris wrote:

One thing that I have noticed when I’m out in the country is that drink-driving seems to be more frequent, and perhaps more accepted, than in town; not uncommon to see guys drinking three or four pints and then getting in the car. Presumably multiple causes including lower density of police operations, lack of public transport, more dispersed population et cetera. This is only an impression, might be completely wrong and don’t mean to imply that everyone in rural areas is a drunk driver!

Is part of that perhaps that people who are just a little over the limit, and therefore still able to make decisions (usually poor ones) and plan a route instead of being on drunk-homing-pigeon autopilot, will choose a route home using quiet rural roads over the main roads assuming they’ll have a lower chance of being spotted by the police?

[Dnnnnnn]

Daveyraveygravey wrote:

Daveyraveygravey wrote:

That definition of “outside settlements of 10,000” caught my eye, it’s a bit vague

http://www.gov.uk/government/collections/rural-urban-classification

[brooksby]

Sriracha wrote:

Sriracha wrote:

brooksby wrote:

That’s right, boys and girls and non-binaries

I’m not sure it’s possible to be non-binary, since either you are non-binary or you’re not.

[Gergaskman]

My experience is that this is

My experience is that this is correct, though what proportion it represents of a wider and more complex issue who knows?

[Author]

Replies