30kph coming to Dublin road near you? (note warning in post #254)

MJohnston · 25-07-2020 9:35pm

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Do you want my bank account information too?

Have you never seen a separate cycle lane? One separate from the road? Sheltered life.

I’ve cycled on plenty of them that are awful. N11, for example. I’m not sure why you can’t link to the cycle path in question, doesn’t reveal anything private about you. Unless of course you’re making it all up.

25-07-2020 9:44pm

MJohnston wrote: »

I’ve cycled on plenty of them that are awful. N11, for example. I’m not sure why you can’t link to the cycle path in question, doesn’t reveal anything private about you. Unless of course you’re making it all up.

Nope I’m not. This one is very near my house.

Bottom line, there’s a separate cycle lane and they use the road so they’re a cretin.

AndrewJRenko · 25-07-2020 9:57pm

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Nope I’m not. This one is very near my house.

Bottom line, there’s a separate cycle lane and they use the road so they’re a cretin.

Though you could have posted details of the lane in question without mentioning your house, and no-one would have been any the wiser. A cynic might think that you're covering something up.

Presumably the one near your house is the only instance that you see of a cyclist not using a cyclist to your frustration?

MJohnston · 25-07-2020 9:58pm

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Nope I’m not. This one is very near my house.

Bottom line, there’s a separate cycle lane and they use the road so they’re a cretin.

Lol nobody knew you lived near it until you just mentioned it. Amazing, and you’re calling someone else a cretin?

Tell you what, I could list half a dozen cycle paths that I regularly avoid and use the road because they’re so badly implemented.

magicbastarder · 25-07-2020 10:04pm

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Nope I’m not. This one is very near my house.

here's an astounding piece of information - you could have just posted the link, and *not* mentioned it was near your house, and no-one would have been any the wiser. instead, now your point just looks evasive and completely unconvincing.

magicbastarder · 25-07-2020 10:06pm

also, it's gas how this has somehow become the fault of cyclists not doing what motorists want them to do.
again.
and again.
and again.

25-07-2020 10:19pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

also, it's gas how this has somehow become the fault of cyclists not doing what motorists want them to do.
again.
and again.
and again.

It’s not about what motorists want them to do, it’s about what they should do. But there’s always that defiance to do what’s most awkward for motorists in them. It’s why they’re generally so hated.

magicbastarder · 25-07-2020 10:47pm

so that's why i hate myself for owning a car while i'm cycling, and for owning a bike when i'm driving?
i must tell my psychotherapist.

MJohnston · 25-07-2020 10:57pm

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

It’s not about what motorists want them to do, it’s about what they should do. But there’s always that defiance to do what’s most awkward for motorists in them. It’s why they’re generally so hated.

It’s extremely revealing that you think cyclists are doing things out of defiance of motorists! That says so much about the motorist attitude, it truly does, that everything is about *them* or should be.

I hate to break it to you - the vast majority of cyclists are doing something that seems defiant to motorists to *protect themselves from the ignorance and carelessness of motorists*. Simple as that.

SeanW · 25-07-2020 11:08pm

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

It’s why they’re generally so hated.

It's not just motorists. Most of us who drive also walk frequently on our streets and find that the behaviour of cyclists at times is a menace.

Then we come home and read from cyclists about how motorists are responsible for everything bar the Bubonic Plague ...

It's not unusual for pedestrians to have to scramble out of the way of, or be hit by, lawbreaking cyclists. To be fair, I've never been hit by a cyclist but that's only down to luck, careful observation, a willingness to negotiate with lawbreakers on the footpath and at green-man crossings, and sometimes a combination of two or all three. But hey, let's focus on motorists who normally drive with manners :rolleyes:

magicbastarder · 25-07-2020 11:15pm

SeanW wrote: »

It's not unusual for pedestrians to have to scramble out of the way of, or be hit by, lawbreaking cyclists.

where do you live, that you need to have the reflexes of a ninja simply to survive?

John_Rambo · 25-07-2020 11:24pm

SeanW wrote: »

It's not just motorists. Most of us who drive also walk frequently on our streets and find that the behaviour of cyclists at times is a menace.

Then we come home and read from cyclists about how motorists are responsible for everything bar the Bubonic Plague ...

It's not unusual for pedestrians to have to scramble out of the way of, or be hit by, lawbreaking cyclists. To be fair, I've never been hit by a cyclist but that's only down to luck, careful observation, a willingness to negotiate with lawbreakers on the footpath and at green-man crossings, and sometimes a combination of two or all three. But hey, let's focus on motorists who normally drive with manners :rolleyes:

Good point, me neither. Obviously our joint experience of zero injuries or fatalities regarding cyclists are compatible with the norm in Ireland and the rest of the world. Not an issue thankfully.

30kph has been in affect in my area for a while now. As a driver I've found it manageable but have been guilty of creeping upwards to 35kph when in a rush to get somewhere. As a parent with kids of an age where they'd be heading out to various sports events on their own I'm happy with the reduced speed limits.
I do find it hard to keep below the speed limit on larger, wider roads but I've seen a reduction of road space in areas around the suburbs that will reduce the temptation to speed.

MJohnston · 25-07-2020 11:31pm

SeanW wrote: »

It's not just motorists. Most of us who drive also walk frequently on our streets and find that the behaviour of cyclists at times is a menace.

Then we come home and read from cyclists about how motorists are responsible for everything bar the Bubonic Plague ...

It's not unusual for pedestrians to have to scramble out of the way of, or be hit by, lawbreaking cyclists. To be fair, I've never been hit by a cyclist but that's only down to luck, careful observation, a willingness to negotiate with lawbreakers on the footpath and at green-man crossings, and sometimes a combination of two or all three. But hey, let's focus on motorists who normally drive with manners :rolleyes:

99% of pedestrians deaths every year are caused by motorists. *99%* compared to 1% of pedestrian deaths caused by cyclists.

That’s the kind of percentage that highlights that manners has absolutely fück all to do with this conversation. What you intended to do doesn’t matter when you’re talking about machines that can crush the bodies of humans in a second through pure accident.

Manners aren’t the main problem with drivers (although it’s comically ignorant of you to claim that motorists are well mannered), it is ignorance, carelessness, lapses in concentration, and selfishness.

These are the traits that turn driving into a lethal activity for other people on the streets, be they other drivers, pedestrians, or cyclists.

And those are the reasons why there *will* be 30kph speed limits across most of Dublin soon. Those are the reasons why the new minister for transport is likely to push for the NTA to be allowed to run ANPR enforcement of bus lanes, red lights, yellow boxes and hopefully eventually speed limits. Those are the reasons why countless roads are being converted into pedestrian spaces, why Grangegorman was freed by stopping the rat run, why Blackrock is now a one-way system, why a car lane on the quays has been converted into cycle lanes. On and on. These things are done among many reasons because people don’t trust motorists to be considerate or even just keep their eyes on the road.

magicbastarder · 25-07-2020 11:34pm

MJohnston wrote: »

99% of pedestrians deaths every year are caused by motorists. *99%* compared to 1% of pedestrian deaths caused by cyclists.

1%? Is it even that? The last one I know of in Ireland happened in 2002 or 2003, where it was determined the cyclist was to blame.

MJohnston · 25-07-2020 11:58pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

1%? Is it even that? The last one I know of in Ireland happened in 2002 or 2003, where it was determined the cyclist was to blame.

I think there was one in Phoenix Park more recently than those, but yeah says it all that you can identify individual incidents of that, compared to the endless statistics of death by vehicular incompetence

MJohnston · 26-07-2020 12:00am

MJohnston wrote: »

I think there was one in Phoenix Park more recently than those, but yeah says it all that you can identify individual incidents of that, compared to the endless statistics of death by vehicular incompetence

To correct myself - the collision in Phoenix Park between a pedestrian and a cyclist resulted in the death *of the cyclist*

Dublinstiofán · 26-07-2020 12:28am

I tried to drive at 30km/h earlier this afternoon in a 50km/h zone when nobody else was around. It’s not practical. I’d argue it’s more unsafe as people will be tailgating and trying to illegally overtake. Gonna be catastrophic to try have the whole city moving at that pace.

Are cyclists going to have to reduce their speed to 30km/h aswell to keep the pedestrians safe? Is that what it’s all about? Keeping pedestrians safe?

Never mind all the new speed cameras already popping up in the newest of the 30km/h zones.

Thingymebob · 26-07-2020 12:37am

Cyclists are not angels and I’m sick of the cyclists perfect/drivers are evil. In 2012 I was hit by a cyclist running a red light while I was crossing on the green walk on Leeson St - I was 90% across the road. I had two operations to pin my wrist and still suffer pain. The cyclist rode off, leaving me in the gutter, never to be seen again. I spent the best part of a year out of work, lost my job. Cyclists should be licensed to use the road, it’s a significant reason I have front and back Dash cameras.

Charles Babbage · 26-07-2020 12:42am

magicbastarder wrote: »

where do you live, that you need to have the reflexes of a ninja simply to survive?

It doesn't really matter where he lives, the conduct of cyclists is not materially different in one place rather than the other.

Thingymebob wrote: »

Cyclists are not angels and I’m sick of the cyclists perfect/drivers are evil. In 2012 I was hit by a cyclist running a red light while I was crossing on the green walk on Leeson St - I was 90% across the road. I had two operations to pin my wrist and still suffer pain. The cyclist rode off, leaving me in the gutter, never to be seen again. I spent the best part of a year out of work, lost my job. Cyclists should be licensed to use the road, it’s a significant reason I have front and back Dash cameras.

My sympathies Thingymebob, almost every pedestrian has been hit by cyclists on one or more occasions. However, you get no sympathy here from the cyclo lobby who regard you as a necessary casualty in their campaign.
Of course some motorists are reckless, but their behaviour has been corralled by some level of enforcement, they have to be tested, their vehicles are numbered. Cyclists are subject to little or no enforcement. For instance their is a strong case of traffic light cameras in Dublin, but the most frequent breakers of traffic lights are cyclists and no effort would be made to charge them or sanction them in any way.

MJohnston · 26-07-2020 12:45am

Charles Babbage wrote: »

It doesn't really matter where he lives, the conduct of cyclists is not materially different in one place rather than the other.

What relevance is it to a thread about 30kph speed limits?

Charles Babbage · 26-07-2020 2:09am

MJohnston wrote: »

What relevance is it to a thread about 30kph speed limits?

I think you should address that question to the person who posted the comment I replied to.

M256 · 26-07-2020 9:17am

magicbastarder wrote: »

where do you live, that you need to have the reflexes of a ninja simply to survive?

In the Docklands there are areas where the dedicated cycle path goes next to the pedestrian path but then moves out to the road. Guess what, cyclists continue cycling on the pedestrian path. A few near misses as I walk there everyday to work. If the 30kmh limit is about safety cyclists should be equally regulated as their speeds are comparable.

MJohnston · 26-07-2020 9:17am

Charles Babbage wrote: »

I think you should address that question to the person who posted the comment I replied to.

Just because you’re replying to someone doesn’t make it any less off topic.

magicbastarder · 26-07-2020 9:23am

MJohnston wrote: »

I think there was one in Phoenix Park more recently than those, but yeah says it all that you can identify individual incidents of that, compared to the endless statistics of death by vehicular incompetence

There was a collision down near Clonmel (I think) last year, which resulted in the death of the pedestrian. I'm not sure yet of the results of any inquest which might explain what happened.

MJohnston · 26-07-2020 9:24am

M256 wrote: »

In the Docklands there are areas where the dedicated cycle path goes next to the pedestrian path but then moves out to the road. Guess what, cyclists continue cycling on the pedestrian path.

You mean like the awful cycle path at the Rockets restaurant? Hmm I wonder why it could be that cyclists don’t want to be forced out at a 90 degree angle into fast moving traffic?

Now, maybe once the speed limit is 30kph it’ll be less terrifying for some people, as I’m sure most drivers will of course carefully respect the posted speed limits.

Personally I just avoid that cycle path entirely and cycle on the road, making sure to take the lane. But then, that means I’m holding up precious traffic. Being a cyclist in conversation with motorists, you soon learn that you can’t win no matter what you do. They’re just irritated that you’re not as selfish as them!

magicbastarder · 26-07-2020 9:32am

Dublinstiofán wrote: »

Are cyclists going to have to reduce their speed to 30km/h aswell to keep the pedestrians safe? Is that what it’s all about?

Again, they won't because speed limits don't apply to pedal cycles and because cyclists doing more than 30km/h in these contexts are a rarity. Only an extremely fit cyclist could maintain 35km/h on the flat.

MJohnston · 26-07-2020 10:06am

magicbastarder wrote: »

Again, they won't because speed limits don't apply to pedal cycles and because cyclists doing more than 30km/h in these contexts are a rarity. Only an extremely fit cyclist could maintain 35km/h on the flat.

I’d say it’s almost physically impossible in the city centre to hit 30kph on a bike, unless you’re breaking red lights, but then you’re breaking a law.

Duckjob · 26-07-2020 10:49am

Funny how a thread about drivers being tasked with being a bit more careful and responsible when driving in built up areas gets hijacked by posters frothing at the mouth and ends up being about the various "wrongdoings" of people on bikes.

You've got to admire the deflectory skills.

AndrewJRenko · 26-07-2020 12:11pm

Charles Babbage wrote: »

My sympathies Thingymebob, almost every pedestrian has been hit by cyclists on one or more occasions. However, you get no sympathy here from the cyclo lobby who regard you as a necessary casualty in their campaign.
Of course some motorists are reckless, but their behaviour has been corralled by some level of enforcement, they have to be tested, their vehicles are numbered. Cyclists are subject to little or no enforcement. For instance their is a strong case of traffic light cameras in Dublin, but the most frequent breakers of traffic lights are cyclists and no effort would be made to charge them or sanction them in any way.

Every pedestrian has been hit by a cyclist Charles? Time to wake up now from your dreamworld please. Where on earth did you get this from.

And BTW, motorists are the most frequent breakers of traffic lights in Dublin - 88% of red light jumpers are motorists.
http://kerrycyclingcampaign.org/but-all-drivers-break-the-lights/

Dublinstiofán wrote: »

I tried to drive at 30km/h earlier this afternoon in a 50km/h zone when nobody else was around. It’s not practical. I’d argue it’s more unsafe as people will be tailgating and trying to illegally overtake. Gonna be catastrophic to try have the whole city moving at that pace.

Are cyclists going to have to reduce their speed to 30km/h aswell to keep the pedestrians safe? Is that what it’s all about? Keeping pedestrians safe?

Why exactly is not practical? What kind of speeds do you when driving around car parks? If the best reason you can come up for not managing the speed of drivers is that other drivers will drive even more recklessly, you're on slightly dodgy ground.

MJohnston wrote: »

I think there was one in Phoenix Park more recently than those, but yeah says it all that you can identify individual incidents of that, compared to the endless statistics of death by vehicular incompetence

It was a cyclist that was killed in the Phoenix Park, as a result of a pedestrian stepping into the bike lane.

M256 wrote: »

If the 30kmh limit is about safety cyclists should be equally regulated as their speeds are comparable.

Their speeds aren't really comparable, but even if they were, their momentum is in a completely different ballpark. It's the difference between a 10-20kg bike and a 1-3 tonne vehicle.

Spook_ie · 28-07-2020 10:12am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Every pedestrian has been hit by a cyclist Charles? Time to wake up now from your dreamworld please. Where on earth did you get this from.

And BTW, motorists are the most frequent breakers of traffic lights in Dublin - 88% of red light jumpers are motorists.
http://kerrycyclingcampaign.org/but-all-drivers-break-the-lights/

Why exactly is not practical? What kind of speeds do you when driving around car parks? If the best reason you can come up for not managing the speed of drivers is that other drivers will drive even more recklessly, you're on slightly dodgy ground.

It was a cyclist that was killed in the Phoenix Park, as a result of a pedestrian stepping into the bike lane.

Their speeds aren't really comparable, but even if they were, their momentum is in a completely different ballpark. It's the difference between a 10-20kg bike and a 1-3 tonne vehicle.

Anyone ever wondered why it's always a 10-20kg bike and never a 10-20kg bike plus a 50 - 100kg rider? These bikes are obviously controlled by a person rather than being autonomous.

And before AJR gets his knickers in a twist, it's merely an observation.

Duckjob · 28-07-2020 10:26am

Spook_ie wrote: »

Anyone ever wondered why it's always a 10-20kg bike and never a 10-20kg bike plus a 50 - 100kg rider? These bikes are obviously controlled by a person rather than being autonomous.

And before AJR gets his knickers in a twist, it's merely an observation.

Not a very astute observation. He compared it to a vehicle, not a vehicle + occupants.

Spook_ie · 28-07-2020 10:32am

Duckjob wrote: »

Not a very astute observation. He compared it to a vehicle, not a vehicle + occupants.

Ah I knew somebody wouldn't have had his weetabix today, how many vehicles or bicycles do you see travelling at 30kph without occupants? ( OR cyclists )

Edited to include cyclists before the pedants descend en masse

Duckjob · 28-07-2020 10:59am

Spook_ie wrote: »

Ah I knew somebody wouldn't have had his weetabix today, how many vehicles or bicycles do you see travelling at 30kph without occupants? ( OR cyclists )

None of either. We all know both cars and bikes need at least a driver/rider which is exactly why it's a fair comparison to not mention either.

And it sounds to me like only a ballpark comparison anyway since the vehicle weight itself depending on model could vary in weight by over a tonne, plus there could be an additional 4-5 occupants which would add other 200-400kg.

Its just strikes me as a bit of a petty thing to try to score a point on.

jim salter · 28-07-2020 11:59am

https://consultation.dublincity.ie/traffic-and-transport/consultation-proposed-special-speed-limit-2020/consultation/subpage.2016-07-06.7004763650/

MJohnston · 28-07-2020 12:40pm

Submitted a strongly supportive response!

I also mentioned the need to back up the lowered speed limits with a drastic, widespread program of road diets, footpath widening, rat run elimination, and lots of other street design measures that will induce motorists to subconsciously reduce their speed. I honestly think that's more important than enforcement, unless the enforcement can be near-omnipresent.

Spook_ie · 28-07-2020 1:18pm

Duckjob wrote: »

None of either. We all know both cars and bikes need at least a driver/rider which is exactly why it's a fair comparison to not mention either.

And it sounds to me like only a ballpark comparison anyway since the vehicle weight itself depending on model could vary in weight by over a tonne, plus there could be an additional 4-5 occupants which would add other 200-400kg.

Its just strikes me as a bit of a petty thing to try to score a point on.

Sorry, but if you are involved in a collision as a pedestrian or cyclist with another cyclist then the actual mass of what hits you will make a substantial difference.

10kg bike as base line
75kg rider
Mass increase 650%

2000kg car as base line
75kg driver
Mass increase 3.75%

If you can't see that in an argument of cars v cycles that the mass of the cyclist makes a substantial difference, then you shouldn't be using 10kg v 2000kg as an argument

Wonder why it's always cyclists that seem to think the actual cyclist has no mass or effect during a collision?

MJohnston · 28-07-2020 1:23pm

What's that got to do with the public consultation on 30kph speed limits again?

AndrewJRenko · 28-07-2020 1:24pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

Sorry, but if you are involved in a collision as a pedestrian or cyclist with another cyclist then the actual mass of what hits you will make a substantial difference.

10kg bike as base line
75kg rider
Mass increase 650%

2000kg car as base line
75kg driver
Mass increase 3.75%

If you can't see that in an argument of cars v cycles that the mass of the cyclist makes a substantial difference, then you shouldn't be using 10kg v 2000kg as an argument

Wonder why it's always cyclists that seem to think the actual cyclist has no mass or effect during a collision?

The bit that you seem to be missing is the 25-fold increase from the bike/cyclist/85kg to the car/driver/2075kg. That's the real problem.

Spook_ie · 28-07-2020 1:42pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The bit that you seem to be missing is the 25-fold increase from the bike/cyclist/85kg to the car/driver/2075kg. That's the real problem.

I'm not missing that at all, I'm just pointing out that in any calculation or comparison between cyclists and cars you must include the mass of the cyclist.

The impact force of a 75kg cyclist and a 10kg cycle at 20Kph over a 0.5s duration is in the order of peak 1,888N average 944N

The impact force of a 10kg cycle at 20Kph over a 0.5s duration is in the order of peak 222N average 111N

Quite substantial differences if you happen to be the pedestrian or cyclist hit by the 10kg bicycle

All calculations via https://www.gigacalculator.com/calculators/impact-force-calculator.php

Spook_ie · 28-07-2020 1:48pm

MJohnston wrote: »

What's that got to do with the public consultation on 30kph speed limits again?

About the same as AJR's contribution of 10-20kg bikes vs 1 to 3 tonne vehicles, did you want to ask that question of AJR or just me?

MJohnston · 28-07-2020 2:41pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

About the same as AJR's contribution of 10-20kg bikes vs 1 to 3 tonne vehicles, did you want to ask that question of AJR or just me?

It's all irrelevant!

Amirani · 28-07-2020 2:50pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

Sorry, but if you are involved in a collision as a pedestrian or cyclist with another cyclist then the actual mass of what hits you will make a substantial difference.

10kg bike as base line
75kg rider
Mass increase 650%

2000kg car as base line
75kg driver
Mass increase 3.75%

If you can't see that in an argument of cars v cycles that the mass of the cyclist makes a substantial difference, then you shouldn't be using 10kg v 2000kg as an argument

Wonder why it's always cyclists that seem to think the actual cyclist has no mass or effect during a collision?

Your knowledge of physics seems a bit shaky.

It's the absolute magnitude of the force hitting you that's important, not the relative magnitude of the force. An additional 75kg has the same additional impact whether it's coming via a 10kg bike or a 2000kg car. Calculating percentage differences here is really dumb.

Duckjob · 28-07-2020 3:11pm

Indeed.

According to that calculator,

90 kg (10kg bike+90kg rider) @ 30kph = Av: 1.5kN, Peak: 3kN
90kg (10kg bike+90kg rider) @50kph = Av: 2.5kN, Peak: 5kN

1590kg (1.5 tonne car + 90kg driver) @ 30kph = Av: 26.5kN, Peak: 53kN
1590kg (1.5 tonne car + 90kg driver) @ 50kph = Av: 44.2kN, Peak: 88.3kN

So the force of a 90kg (bike + rider) colliding at 50kph (which excludes every cyclist in Dublin City) turns out to be less than 10% of the impact of a 1.5tonne car colliding at 30kph (which is the safety measure being discussed that is causing such wailing and gnashing of teeth here.

The impact of a 90kg (bike + rider) colliding at 30kph (which still excludes most Dublin City cyclists) is just over 5% of a 1.5 tonne car (+driver) doing the same speed.

@spook.ie, Great calculator, thanks !

bmc58 · 28-07-2020 3:13pm

FarmerBob wrote: »

DCC planning rolling out 30kph to most (all?) main routes in the city.
Most residential routes are already 30kph but little media attention about this one.
Can you imagine driving at 30kph on Howth rd, Malahide Rd, Stillorgan Rd, Griffith ave etc. Buses in empty bus lanes sneaking along at 30kph?

https://consultation.dublincity.ie/traffic-and-transport/consultation-proposed-special-speed-limit-2020/

Consultation open until 13 August 2020>>>

https://consultation.dublincity.ie/traffic-and-transport/consultation-proposed-special-speed-limit-2020/consultation/subpage.2016-07-06.7004763650/

Will there be Go safe Vans or Gardai everywhere then?

kenmm · 28-07-2020 3:16pm

bmc58 wrote: »

Will there be Go safe Vans or Gardai everywhere then?

I would guess that there will be sh!t loads of them for the first few weeks, then business as usual thereafter.

(This was the consensus on the massive thread we already had on this..).

Also - nice one for actually getting it back on topic.

Spook_ie · 28-07-2020 4:10pm

Amirani wrote: »

Your knowledge of physics seems a bit shaky.

It's the absolute magnitude of the force hitting you that's important, not the relative magnitude of the force. An additional 75kg has the same additional impact whether it's coming via a 10kg bike or a 2000kg car. Calculating percentage differences here is really dumb.

Duckjob wrote: »

Indeed.

According to that calculator,

90 kg (10kg bike+90kg rider) @ 30kph = Av: 1.5kN, Peak: 3kN
90kg (10kg bike+90kg rider) @50kph = Av: 2.5kN, Peak: 5kN

1590kg (1.5 tonne car + 90kg driver) @ 30kph = Av: 26.5kN, Peak: 53kN
1590kg (1.5 tonne car + 90kg driver) @ 50kph = Av: 44.2kN, Peak: 88.3kN

So the force of a 90kg (bike + rider) colliding at 50kph (which excludes every cyclist in Dublin City) turns out to be less than 10% of the impact of a 1.5tonne car colliding at 30kph (which is the safety measure being discussed that is causing such wailing and gnashing of teeth here.

The impact of a 90kg (bike + rider) colliding at 30kph (which still excludes most Dublin City cyclists) is just over 5% of a 1.5 tonne car (+driver) doing the same speed.

@spook.ie, Great calculator, thanks !

You all seem to think I'm arguing that a car hitting you isn't as bad, I'm not I'm just trying to make people realise that a 10kg bicycle hitting you is in reality a 10kg plus rider hitting you, a fact that it seems cyclists have difficulty in grasping.

I mean to be honest yeah I'd sooner be hit by a cyclist than a car but in reality I'd rather not be hit by either. So for future reference if you want to argue that a 10kg bike isn't going to hurt you remember it's not a 10kg bike, it's a 10kg plus a cyclist.

Duckjob · 28-07-2020 4:31pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

You all seem to think I'm arguing that a car hitting you isn't as bad, I'm not I'm just trying to make people realise that a 10kg bicycle hitting you is in reality a 10kg plus rider hitting you, a fact that it seems cyclists have difficulty in grasping.

I mean to be honest yeah I'd sooner be hit by a cyclist than a car but in reality I'd rather not be hit by either. So for future reference if you want to argue that a 10kg bike isn't going to hurt you remember it's not a 10kg bike, it's a 10kg plus a cyclist.

Nobody here has a problem grasping that there's a difference between 10kg and 10kg + rider.

I'm just putting it to you, and (others here that are raising questions about bikes being subjected to 30kph limit that whether you count a bike rider
is pointless nitpicking (and irrelevent to the thread topic) when compared with of the figures of a car hitting someone at 30kph (which is directly relevent to the thread topic)

Seriously, sometimes you can salvage some credibility by conceeding that you made a silly point. This is one of those times, fella.

Spook_ie · 28-07-2020 4:41pm

Duckjob wrote: »

Nobody here has a problem grasping that there's a difference between 10kg and 10kg + rider.

I'm just putting it to you, and (others here that are raising questions about bikes being subjected to 30kph limit that whether you count a bike rider
is pointless nitpicking (and irrelevent to the thread topic) when compared with of the figures of a car hitting someone at 30kph (which is directly relevent to the thread topic)

Seriously, sometimes you can salvage some credibility by conceeding that you made a silly point. This is one of those times, fella.

It's not a silly point, it's a point being made that you can't (as AJR and others often do) mention this magical 10-20kg cycle that if it's involved in an accident won't hurt people, you have to take into account the total mass involved and the mass of the rider is far more than the mass of the bicycle.

Idleater · 28-07-2020 4:53pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

It's not a silly point, it's a point being made that you can't (as AJR and others often do) mention this magical 10-20kg cycle that if it's involved in an accident won't hurt people, you have to take into account the total mass involved and the mass of the rider is far more than the mass of the bicycle.

Fine, so how difficult is it for a smart but fat lazy slob driving their super light (carbon)fibreglass car to keep to any designated speed limit?

In my opinion, it's easy, and not only that but it's within that smart person's own remit as a road user. Whether it's adhered to or not is only determined by the Gardaí and/or GoSafe. Failure to obey, combined with being caught (however unlikely) is punished.

AndrewJRenko · 28-07-2020 5:13pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

It's not a silly point, it's a point being made that you can't (as AJR and others often do) mention this magical 10-20kg cycle that if it's involved in an accident won't hurt people, you have to take into account the total mass involved and the mass of the rider is far more than the mass of the bicycle.

Except that's not what I said, and I'm pretty to sure it's not what anyone said.

What I said was; "Their speeds aren't really comparable, but even if they were, their momentum is in a completely different ballpark. It's the difference between a 10-20kg bike and a 1-3 tonne vehicle."

So you've gone to all that effort finding your momentum calculators to argue against a strawman position that nobody made.

30kph coming to Dublin road near you? (note warning in post #254)

Comments