first mate

🤣🤣🤣 Not my area, and I defer to others who know more but: Accuracy of pneumatic road tube counters Author(s) McGowen, P.; Sanderson, M. Year 2011 Abstract (EN) Pneumatic road tube counters are a tool that is commonly used to conduct traffic counts on streets and roads. Many professionals have high confidence in the accuracy of road tube counts, and vendors of pneumatic road tubes often claim accuracy rates in the neighborhood of 99 percent. Several studies have been conducted in Montana intended to test the accuracy of road tube count data. These studies have compared road tube data to hand counts and other traffic-counting technologies, and compared results among multiple road tubes set up in series at a single location. The studies found that though the average error in a daily traffic count might be near zero, the absolute error of a typical 15-minute count averaged closer to ten percent. These results suggest that the level of inaccuracy is being masked by the positive and negative counting errors canceling each other out. Errors in speed and classification were much greater. These results raise questions about the reliability of pneumatic road tube counters in accurately measuring traffic volumes. This report compiles the results of these studies and provides a framework for measuring and reporting error.

P68 - I think very much the latter. That seems to be the aim, to undermine. Perhaps a pro troll will turn up. In terms of the counters, Rockets remembered Ex-Dulwicher commenting that they were not good in congested/ slow moving traffic. I got the impression Ex knew a lot about this area and had worked in it.

Another great example of prime deflection above. It is so obvious...Rockets has pretty much trounced Earl on a fairly long debate about the accuracy of traffic counters, re LTNs and Malumbu quickly tries to change the subject with a bland and oh so patronising statement about sharing cars. It's not working!

malambu said: "I'm not compelled to post on social media". 🤣🤣🤣 And yet, here you are, again...

The one where the cyclist at the Dulwich Library LL junction is a classic. He jumps the red lights, turns right just as a female pedestrian is crossing the road he is turning into. Also all those cyclists without lights, at night and cycling on the pavement. Shocking! I hope" Barby" also starts turning his attention to Lime and other company hire e-bikes and scooters blocking pavments.

I was also surprised. It may be a complete red herring but given many more people cycle in the Netherlands I somehow expected them score lower than us, in that the 'goodness' of cycling would somehow permeate the culture ( I am being a bit tongue in cheek). As you say Rockets, perhaps just many more car owners despite the fact they cycle.

It's a bit off the point but one thing I don't understand - happy to be corrected/educated, is that it seems traffic road mortality and fatality risk is considerably higher in the Netherlands than over here? Yet the Netherlands is one of the cycling pioneers. One of the much expressed aims of our myriad traffic changes is to save lives. Why then do we have a better record on this than one of the world's cycling centres?

So no denial from you Mal. Fair enough. But the 'us and them' that you keep referring to and allegedly deplore has also been pushed by you. For the umpteenth time, I am not anti cyclist; I cycle, much more than I drive. But that does not mean I automatically support every move by organisations like LCC to lever in LTNs and CPZ in as many places as they possibly can... just be cause I use a bike as transport? My concern is with traffic measures local to me and how council funding has been prioritised to install measures that I do not believe are necessarily for the greater good. So being anti certain cycle lobby tactics and agendas does not make me anti cyclist. That is a divide that exists in your imagination. As per the Dave Hill article, I also think we need to address careless cycling behaviour of all kinds and figure a way to improve matters before it gets really out of hand. Up in London today I was appalled to see around thirty assorted Lime and non-powered bikes completely blocking a pavement...literally the whole pavement, so it was impossible to pass. A woman was being pushed in a wheelchair and looked quite harried. If the Council and Lime etc... want Lime bikes on every street in the borough this is the type of thing that has to be sorted now. Ditto cycling on pavements, running red lights, running floating pedestrian crossings. There has to be a generally recognised cycling etiquette; that currently falls into a number if camps that I can see, the hardcore let's compete with and pee off motorists time trial type; the I'm in a hurry type and I will because no-one will notice, the I don't give a toss/ get out of my way, the rest who cycle more gently and carefully. I grow tired of the 'yeah but' and 'it's not as bad as' relativist arguments put forth by those who seem to think cyclists can do no wrong. I've also said before, those 'converts' who have enjoyed a bit of motor speed and risk taking will likely do the same on bikes.

Have I ever spoken about "undermining society"? I do wish you'd stop attributing your phrases to others and making up what others say. Tut tut, Mal. So, are you saying LCC are not a pro cycle lobby and are not pro LTN? I thought you were outed some time back as part of Lewisham Cyclists, apologies if that is not the case? Some of what you and other regular posters who support LTNs say seems rather similar to info to be found on the LCC crib sheet of tactics for getting LTNs underway and installed around London.

But given the things said, it does seem a bit sus that the poster has had so few responses. Perhaps the pro lobby either share the view on trolling or they know who the poster is?

Yup that figures. Just wondering if Mr Chicken has a new alias.

But a campaign to support cycling is one thing, a campaign to close off whole streets and increase traffic and pollution on boundary roads as a result is arguably stepping beyond the remit of encouraging and supporting cycling.

I had to laugh when I read that. Perhaps the skateboarders will return once building work on vanity square is finally completed. I would imagine a fair bit of this space will also be used for Lime, scooter and bike storage?

A visit to LCCs website will reveal just how involved the cycle lobby have been in LTNs and CPZ throughout London. For years they have urged members from all around London to involve themselves in council consultations on CPZ and LTN. It has been very deliberate and systematic. I also find it strange that someone giving off such a strong air of moral superiority, telling us all to put our energy into more worthy issues, some of which they list, spends so much time on these threads.

That's because for some of us cycling is a tool not membership of a club and culture. As for LTNs are you really suggesting that LCC and other cycling organisations have not campaigned long and hard for LTNs and CPZ? Getting members to piggyback onto consultations, even though they are not local. The LCC website has page after page of advice directing members how to influence Councils, how to utilise social media, how to organise grass roots campaigning, just to get as many LTNs and CPZs installed as possible.

"and partly because of your obvious confirmation bias / inability to reflect rationally for even a minute." And this illustrates not only your own biases (a seeming inclination to think other people are stupid) but also such a need to try to score a point that you roll over into unnecessary and offensive posting behaviour.

Earl, rules and etiquette around cycling are not clear and we see the negative results of this, daily. It is this aspect that must be addressed. Your sensitivity to what is obvious to many of us is beginning to remind me of the Dave Hill article.

Earl, obviously you did not read my last post, here it is again below; top tip 'recommended' in DP is 5mph, but you already know that with your extensive reading around DP and traffic. Elsewhere road speeds are generally indicated, on paths that do not have dedicated cycle ways, I believe cyclists should dismount and push." " Member 4.2k Posted 3 hours ago (edited) If you want to speed cycle get on a 30mph plus road or go to a velodrome. My view is that on dual purpose paths ie those with dedicated cycle paths, cyclists should still proceed with caution, on paths that are not dual use unless deserted, cyclists should dismount and walk, in the park cyclists should proceed with caution and not exceed 5mph, if lots of pedestrians they probably should consider dismounting and walking. Paths and Parks are spaces where pedestrians take precedence, in my view. I would make an exception for mobility scooters.

If you want to speed cycle get on a 30mph plus road or go to a velodrome. My view is that on dual purpose paths ie those with dedicated cycle paths, cyclists should still proceed with caution, on paths that are not dual use unless deserted, cyclists should dismount and walk, in the park cyclists should proceed with caution and not exceed 5mph, if lots of pedestrians they probably should consider dismounting and walking. Paths and Parks are spaces where pedestrians take precedence, in my view. I would make an exception for mobility scooters.

Well do you or don't you? And, Lime biking commuters are almost certainly going to be travelling at speeds well over what is recommended.

Do agree that last point. What looks like a safe bit of road from the car driver perspective can be seriously risky for the cyclist and I have nearly come a cropper a few times on uneven road, cycling in too close to the kerb. Hidden potholes at night are another nightmare and just as pavement must be improved for pedestrians - with cyclists always giving way to pedestrians- road surfaces must also be made safer.

Wrong thread Earl, this is about Lime Bikes not Dulwich Park in the 60's. But as a serial deflector and derailer (hope you appreciate my little cycling pun) perhaps you could change gears and start a separate thread on your other passion - cars in Dulwich in the 60's and 70's, and please take March with you. Seriously, stop it!

Just to be clear, a number of us with reservations about local LTNs and who feel there are issues with Lime bikes and the way the council has handled change to increase cycling etc, are not anti cyclist. On the contrary we are also cyclists.

Just to be clear, a number of us with reservations about local LTNs etc are not anti cyclist. On the contrary we are also cyclists.

Quite. If there is a pressing need to pedestrianise and 'green' road space, there is arguably a precedent for pedestrianising park space, including tarmac areas within. I would make an exception for the horses.