Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Interesting, but it doesn't tell the details. So the information is kind of not helpful.

By details I mean - well for example today I saw two guys on the mobiles texting whilst riding their bicycles. If they're involved in an accident they would be considered blameless just because they were cyclists (according to new plans, anyway).

PeckhamRose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Interesting, but it doesn't tell the details. So

> the information is kind of not helpful.

> By details I mean - well for example today I saw

> two guys on the mobiles texting whilst riding

> their bicycles. If they're involved in an accident

> they would be considered blameless just because

> they were cyclists (according to new plans,

> anyway).


The details are all contained in the various accident/transport databases. A map is not designed to analyse causation. It is intended to map occurrences spatially.


Were they texting with their gloves on?

This is a great step forward if somewhat futile, can't see the point myself.

I question how up-to-date this is? I have checked on the locations of some of last years fatal incidents yet they don't appear on this map at all!!!???!!!. Really what is the point of this!!!????

Some random cyclists/fatal accidents from last year, NOT SHOWN ON THIS MAP:

Whitechapel/Valance rd/ female/ September 2009.

Elephant & castle/ Female/ mid 2009.

Holborn Viaduct/ Female/ early 2009.

Peckham/ Female/ June 2009.

Embankment nr Westminster/ Female/ Nov 2009

Goswell Road/ Female/ April 2009

etc etc


So, 6 fatal accidents last year in London and they're not on this map.....

*who's wasting who's time....*

To Sue - who's to blame isn't the point I don't think, and I can't help but think that's who's to blame retropsectively doesn't help a killed or injured person. If though a cyclist sees an accident somewhere they go and thinks "I should be a bit careful round there".., then job done.

sniffy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This is a great step forward if somewhat futile,

> can't see the point myself.

> I question how up-to-date this is? I have checked

> on the locations of some of last years fatal

> incidents yet they don't appear on this map at

> all!!!???!!!. Really what is the point of

> this!!!????

> Some random cyclists/fatal accidents from last

> year, NOT SHOWN ON THIS MAP:

> Whitechapel/Valance rd/ female/ September 2009.

> Elephant & castle/ Female/ mid 2009.

> Holborn Viaduct/ Female/ early 2009.

> Peckham/ Female/ June 2009.

> Embankment nr Westminster/ Female/ Nov 2009

> Goswell Road/ Female/ April 2009

> etc etc

>

> So, 6 fatal accidents last year in London and

> they're not on this map.....

> *who's wasting who's time....*



It maps accidents from 2000-2008 so the ones you have listed above wouldn't show up on it. I agree with Ruffers, if it makes someone think about an area which has a high accident rate and they then take it more carefully around there then job done.

It is interesting but doesn't really help in terms of picking out 'dangerous' roads since there's no indication of how well used by cyclists the roads are. An accident 'blackspot' might have hundreds of cyclists through it on a daily basis and very low % of accidents whereas another road might only have two or three markers but only 10 cyclists have ever gone down it.


Still... in terms of junctions to watch out, it is useful although looking at my route to work, the 'worst' ones are the ones that I'd have expected.

sniffy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This is a great step forward if somewhat futile,

> can't see the point myself.

> I question how up-to-date this is? I have checked

> on the locations of some of last years fatal

> incidents yet they don't appear on this map at

> all!!!???!!!. Really what is the point of

> this!!!????

> Some random cyclists/fatal accidents from last

> year, NOT SHOWN ON THIS MAP:

> Whitechapel/Valance rd/ female/ September 2009.

> Elephant & castle/ Female/ mid 2009.

> Holborn Viaduct/ Female/ early 2009.

> Peckham/ Female/ June 2009.

> Embankment nr Westminster/ Female/ Nov 2009

> Goswell Road/ Female/ April 2009

> etc etc

>

> So, 6 fatal accidents last year in London and

> they're not on this map.....

> *who's wasting who's time....*


Crikey sniffy, keep your hair on.


This is a first attempt by someone, which contains all the data for a number of years. No, it doesn't include the most recent. And yes, I'm sure it can be improved. Most things can.


Think of it as a 'beta', version 0.8: I'm sure the person who created it - and who has no doubt devoted considerable time to gathering data from disparate sources - would welcome constructive suggestions for improvement. Such as then combining this data with some kind of cycling traffic data.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Hi - I posted a request for some help with a stuck door and possible leaky roof. I had responses from Lukasz at Look_as.com and Pawel at Sublime Builders. I don't see any/many reviews - has anyone used either person?  Could use a recommendation rather then just being contact by the tradespeople... Many Thanks 
    • I'm a bit worried by your sudden involvement on this Forum.  The former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor Mountbatten in an anglicisation of Von Battenburg adopted by that branch of our Royal Family in 1917 due to anti-German sentiment. Another anglicisation could be simply Battenburg as in the checker board cake.  So I surmise that your are Andrew Battenburg, aka Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and that you have infiltrated social media so that the country can put the emphasis on Mandelson ather than yourself.  Bit of a failure. I don't expect an answer from police custody.  
    • We had John fit our PLYKEA kitchen (IKEA cabinets with custom doors) and would happily recommend him and Gabi to anyone. Gabi handled all communication and was brilliant throughout — responsive and happy to answer questions however detailed. John is meticulous, cares about the small details, and was a pleasure to have in the house. The carpentry required for the custom doors was done to a high standard, and he even refinished the plumbing under the sink to sit better with the new cabinets — a small touch that made a real difference. They were happy to return and tie up a few things that couldn't be finished in the time, which we appreciated. No hesitations recommending them.
    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...