Would I Want My Wife to Cycle?

Looking at statistics, cycling is safe.

Looking at my videos might appear to tell a different story, but statistically cycling is safer than walking (per unit distance) in the UK. However, statistics are a dangerous beast, and can often hide horrors under the surface. So is cycling really safe?

Humans are often very poor at perceiving risk. We often overestimate it. I know from previous work I have done how scared of small doses of radiation people can often be, with little or no basis in reality. This is often the case with cycling. Often when I mention to people that I cycle commute I get replies like, 'oh, isn't that dangerous', 'surprised you're still here', and 'you must have a deathwish'.

Yes, things could go wrong, but then then things can go wrong gardening and I no-one bats an eyelid when I take the lawn mower out.


However, recently during a conversation with my wife I realised something. First, I realised that I had a wife, which is something that many Youtube pundits suggest would never happen. More importantly though I realised that whilst I would love my wife to cycle to her work, I would actually be concerned for her if she did it.


So I am happy to cycle to work myself, but don't want my wife to? Double standards?!

This is not a picture of my wife.

The difference is that I have been cycling in the urban environment for nearly six years now. I started off quite timid (using the odd pavement!) and over time have grown more confident, and capable of mixing safely (fingers crossed that continues) with heavy traffic. I enjoy mixing with traffic. Not as some might suggest for the conflict that occasionally occurs, but for the days when you glide with, through and around the traffic seamlessly. I find it immensely enjoyable when it all works.

My risk of incident over the years has probably remained the same. When I started and my skill set was smaller and rode more timidly. As I got better and started mixing with the traffic my risk remained fairly steady as I had developed the skills through practice. Thus my cycling is probably as safe now as when I cycled on the odd path.

However, if someone was to start out now, and try and cycle as I do, they would be at significantly increased risk. There is no way I could expect my wife to filter through two lanes of slow moving traffic safely. I have become this 'vehicular cyclist' because I enjoy challenges, and I don't mind taking the leap into the unknown. Not everyone is built like that. Not everyone would enjoy what I do, day in day out. In fact I can understand why some might be completely terrified to do it. So whilst I was able to mix more with traffic whilst keeping my risk the same, others might not be able or even want to do that.

So expecting a majority of people to become 'vehicular cyclists' from day one will never happen. Yet, cycling on the paths is not the answer either.


So that is why I wouldn't want my wife to cycle the way I do.


She doesn't have the same attitude to risk as I do, and most importantly she shouldn't need to.

Riding a bike, should be as easy as....well, as easy as riding a bike. As things currently stand, it isn't.


So, this is why I am changing my attitude to the building of and campaigning for separate cycle facilities and changes in the law to protect cyclists. People like my wife should not have to build up a new skill set over a number of years. They should not have to be concerned with the principles of traffic herding, lane control or SMIDSY avoidance techniques. Everyone should be able to cycle with the minimum of preparation.That can be achieved through infrastructure and new legislation that is designed both to ease the passage ot the cyclist, and to encourage drivers to drive mores responsibly.

Yes, it will take time, and texts like Cyclecraft, are certainly relevant now and will always have some relevance in the future where the lanes come to an end. It's a book I'd highly recommend. However, how many people in Copenhagen or Amsterdam have read Cyclecraft? They don't have to.

However I hope, soon, a day will come where my wife can just ride her bike without having to becoming an expert in urban cycling techniques.


Edit: Please note, the fact that my wife is a woman (I'm quite pleased she is) has nothing to do with my fear of her cycling. She is a better driver than me, and a MUCH better horse rider than me, so I don't doubt for a second that she could be a safer cyclist than me. Its the fact that she would be new to cycling, and any new cyclist if trying to cycle on busy urban roads (and they can be very busy in Glasgow) has a steep learning curve. There shouldn't need to be a steep learning curve. If my wife was a man (personally I'm quite pleased she isn't) I'd feel exactly the same.  


Phew! Glad that's clear up! :-)

A Tail of Two Passes - The Letter

What follows is the letter I have just sent to Allma Construction. It's a thank you to the driver for his textbook pass discussed here.

Don't forget to reward good driving, either by a thank you at the time (if it is safe to do so) or where appropriate with a letter to the drivers company.

Dear xxx,

I was very disappointed not to receive a reply to my last e-mail to you which I sent to you on the 4th of April. I would still be interested in your reply to my questions so I have forwarded the e-mail below.

However, last week 8th June at approximately 8:15am I was passed by another of your lorries. The video is here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rllHTrPHgY (registration number SK11GYE).

I felt compelled to write to you to say thank you to the driver of that lorry. I think it is obvious from the video how different the two passes were. This new pass was textbook in every way. Therefore, I would ask that you pass my thanks on to the driver. I would also like to say thank you to you. On the face of it it would appear that any action you have taken was successful. Of course it is also possible that this driver just drives to a better standard.

Please feel free to use this video for driver training purposes. In fact, if you did, and did so publicly it would provide some excellent PR for your company. Not only would it show improving driving standards, but that the company took those driving standards seriously.

Best regards

Separate Cycle facilities: What to do in the meantime.

One of the easiest things in the world is to list what is wrong. Specifically, what is wrong with the situation on the UK's road that makes cycling less popular than it should be.

Bad driving, bad cycling, lack of facilities, risk of accident, lack of momentum, the weather, etc. The list goes on. It's an easy list to compile. What is significantly more difficult is to list the answers, and yet, this is the holy grail. Remove the barriers, whilst at the same time showing people the benefits, and people will cycle. The more that cycle, the safer the roads become for everyone.

Is this safety in numbers?

So, what could be done to get more people cycling?

There are two completely different views on the overall approach to getting more people cycling. I'll call them intergrationists and separatists.  The integrationists want cyclists to be accepted on the roads as they are. They see no need for cycle lanes, in fact they often see them as decisive. Cyclists should be accepted as traffic.
Then there are the separatists. They look to the continent and see Copenhagen and Amsterdam as shining examples of how money well spent (lots of money) can lead to well designed and well used separate cycling facilities. Cyclists are generally taken off the road and out the way of cars.

For those that read my blog regularly (thanks for reading!) you will probably see me slotting into the integrationists. You'd be right, certainly in the way I practice my cycling. However, I concede that in an ideal world separate cycling facilities if done correctly it would be.....well....ideal! So perhaps separatistism is the way for he future, but what about today? I am at heart, a pragmatist, and I realise that utopia is a long way off.

So what can we do now that can get more cyclists on the streets now which would not only make the roads safer, but perhaps give us a louder voice to help bring utopia about?

As I mentioned in a previous blog

1) We need to get drivers to realise that the more cyclists on the roads the better it is for them, and everyone else.

2)We need to get more drivers out of their cars and on to bikes.

So it's all about marketing. Marketing cyclists, showing that we are not the baddies and we don't go about in marauding hordes knocking down old grannies. At the same time we need to market cycling itself, as a viable, and surprisingly fun way of getting about our urban landscapes.

So, do I have any ideas on how to get there?


What about a campaign along the lines of 'Cyclist = Q-1'. That is each cyclist equals one less car in the queue. Thus the more cyclists there are, the less congestion there would be and the faster everyone would get to work. Yes, with more cyclists on the road maximum speeds might be reduced, but what would the effect on average speed be? Certainly in busy urban areas you might be surprised.

The suggestion of Bike Celebration Stations made by Alexwarrior is, I think, and excellent one. On busy commutes Celebration stations are set up when cyclists can pull into and get free breakfast, other goodies, vouchers etc, all in view of the drivers stuck in queues. This could become an annual or even more regular event, possibly moving around the city during the summer months.

These are just two ideas. What do you think? We need more ideas of course, so if you have any.....

Delay in Part 3 Review

I was planning on publishing the final part of the Helmet camera review today. However, for two reasons I'm delaying it.

The first and most trivial reason is I've been busy! That's what having 3 kids and a full time job do for you!

However, the real reason is that I bought one of the cameras, the Contour GPS. At first things were great, but now I'm not so sure.The camera has been very temperamental, especially since the last firmware upgrade (1.15). It keeps hanging and crashing, and doesn't always charge the battery correctly. This issue may be solved in the next firmware upgrade soon, however until then I'd suggest that you don't buy the Contour GPS.

Contour are renowned for their customer support, so I am hopeful. However, it does seem that they release products and firmware far too quickly and don't do enough beta testing. Perhaps the Contour GPS was a beta test for the Contour+ that has just been released in the US and will be released here in the UK shortly.

On a happier note, DogCamsport have sent me a DogCam HD Wide to test. I'm still testing it at the moment, but I think it is a better option than the DogCam HD that I tested previously. Watch this space for a full review.

This morning I was glad to be testing the DogCam HD wide. My Contour just would'nt switch on, so having the DogCam meant I managed to catch some interesting footage. you might even hear me sing...... :-o

More soon......

Has this blog got it wrong?

I'm sure there are those that read this blog and think I talk a load of rubbish. But, leaving modesty aside, most that read this blog agree with 'most' of the points I make. I get my fair share of virtual head nodding. When that happens it makes me feel good.

That is exactly what is wrong with this blog. Like I suggested in my previous blog about bike week, I too am most often preaching to the converted. I've never researched it, but I can safely say that the vast majority of the demographic that reads this blog are cyclists.

That's great. Together we can formulate ideas, agree on the risks and benefits, and generally pat each others backs. But in the grand scheme of things, what does that achieve?

Absolutely nothing. It's a bit like a tree falling in a forest hundreds of miles from anyone. It will have made a lot of noise, but no-one who can clear up the mess will ever hear it.  

Unless of course, we go out and spread the good news to those that don't cycle, and have never even considered it as an option.

This is where the thinking for my last few posts has come from. To make cycling safe, we need to do two simple things:

1) Convert more drivers to cyclists. The more cyclists there are the safer we all are.

2) Ensure that those drivers who don't cycle or who never want to cycle, like us. If drivers like us, i.e. realise that one more cyclist is one less car holding them up, then maybe they would treat us better.

So what do we need to do to achieve these goals? I'll be exploring that over the next few blog posts, hopefully with your help. Converting drivers to cyclists is probably the easiest to achieve. Perhaps my Critical Pass idea is one way of converting a few drivers, although knowing that some drivers don't like cyclists filtering, and are inexplicably fearful of it, that could backfire. I don't think it would enamour us to many drivers.  

Another idea that has been suggested in the comments of my previous post is setting up Celebration Stations on bike/car commuter routes. These stations would provide goodies, food and vouchers etc for the cyclists using the route, all in clear view of the drivers stuck in the queue next to the station. That is a very interesting idea and might help with conversion. Would they like us more though?

Maybe to get them to like us we need to..... yes we need to keep to the rules, but more than that, we need to show them that more cyclists on the road is a good thing for them. One less car in the queue. How do we do that?

I'm also trying to think of ways of getting leaflets or something similar to drivers stuck in the jams? How do you do that without annoying the drivers or getting on the wrong side of the law? What would the leaflets say? It is suggested that safety is the number 1 concern stopping people taking up cycling. Perhaps it would provide detail on the risks of not cycling!

So, go on my cycling readers (and any non-cycling readers!), what do you think of these ideas, and do you have any of your own?