A taxi firm in York has claimed it is the first in the world to roll out the controversial Cycle Alert safety scheme for keeping tabs on local riders.
Streamline Taxis will now be using Cycle Alert, whose Radio-frequency identification (RFID) relies on local riders carrying a tag, which will alert a driver that a cyclist is nearby.
The University of York, which promotes Streamline to students as its recommended taxi provider, has encouraged the partnership between Cycle Alert and Streamline.
Streamline Taxis' business manager Bob Gilbert told the York Press: "With our link-up with the university, when Cycle Alert came up we had a meeting and they asked us if we would like to see how it was going.
"We thought let's go for it. Anything we can do to make York a safer place for everybody is worthwhile.
"A lot of students ride pedal cycles, so it links in well.
"To be the first taxi company in the world to do it, I think that's great news. We like to think we are leading the way."
Mr Gilbert added: “By ensuring our Streamline cabs have the latest cyclist detection technology we hope to make our drivers the safest in York, and make York the safest city in the Britain for its cyclists, many of whom are our customers.”
A spokesman for The University of York said: “The safety of our staff and students is a priority for us. We are pleased that Streamline are taking these steps to help protect our cycling community.”
But as we reported last year, Cycle Alert is not universally popular with cyclists.
A number of bin lorries in Croydon have been fitted with the electronic alerts - but concerns have been raised that it might make cycling more dangerous with those riders who do not have the tags.
The controversial scheme, Cycle Alert, is being trialled on four refuse lorries, but Croydon Cycle Campaign say HGV drivers will be lulled into a false sense of security, while it will be impossible to tag enough of the area’s cyclists.
Manufacturers of the £400 device are hoping to roll it out nationally after piloting, and cyclists in the area are being encouraged to pick up a free electronic tag from cycle shops in the borough, which will sound an alert in the lorry’s cab if they come within 2.5m.
An LED display shows the driver the position of the cyclist.
But Kristian Gregory of the Cycling Campaign said: "We are seriously concerned about the effect Cycle Alert will have on road safety.
"We are concerned that tagging a high enough percentage of cyclists will not be viable, and that HGV drivers will be given a false sense of security by the device, when an untagged cyclist may be nearby."
Mr Gregory added: "We believe safety devices should only need fitting to the lorry itself.
"This will be safer for cyclists and also pedestrians who are also at high risk from lorries with blind spots.
"Safer lorry cab designs are also needed to eliminate blind spots.
Ahead of its launch in 2013, we reported how Cycle Alert’s co-founder, Peter Le Masurier, said: “Many systems have been designed for HGV’s, so that drivers can be more aware of cyclists close to their vehicle.
“But everybody needs to take responsibility for their own safety on the road.
“Cycle Alert empowers cyclists to make themselves more obvious to HGV drivers – no mean feat when you consider the relative size difference – and allows HGV drivers to protect themselves from the devastating impact of an accident.
“In fact I was inspired to develop this technology when I heard an interview with a truck driver who had been involved in an accident with a cyclist – I recognised then that not one but two families are left devastated by such incidents.”
Add new comment
12 comments
The only good thing about this report is the implication that a taxi firm values cyclists as being potential customers as well and is prepared to put some effort and money into helping their drivers be safer. That's the key thing I believe, that the focus is on the drivers being more aware and the onus is on them. Yodel are also supposed to have cyclist friendly drivers and I'd rather hope that other firms will continue to recognise that they need to have a best practice driving ethos that makes everyone safer. As for this technology, I wouldn't go anywhere near it. In the same way I wont be putting a fifteen foot flag on my bike either. Competent drivers and consideration is the best way forward, enforced properly in law when people are negligent. Carrot; in that cyclists reward firms prompting safe driving and Stick; proper sentences for criminal behaviour.
Suggest to people on the continent that they should adopt this and see them just look at you like a fool.
Gloves and a helmet I don't mind, I am 100% convinced that they have saved me from injury on more than 1 occasion and I can make use of them all on my own without having another vehicle assist in the accident.
Lights and visible clothing are common sense and courtesy to other road users.
Having to fit collision warning beacons is a step too far, as it is yet another way of shifting responsibility away from the driver and onto more vulnerable road users. It creates a dependence on technology that leaves those without a tag effectively invisible, and blameable. Also creates an assumption from a cyclist carrying such a beacon that they do literally appear on the radar.
Now if there was a proximity detector system that could be fitted as standard to all psv, hgv, lgv and taxis, which alerted the driver to bicycles and pedestrians in blind spot areas, and recorded close pass events for evidence, well maybe that would be a good thing, but given the fuss that the freight haulage lobby are making over the simple step of putting a sodding window in the cab door I don't think there will be much industry support for the additional costs involved.
Where did you get your invisibility cloak? I've looked everywhere, but I've only ever found visible clothes.
The parking sensors on my old Jeep Grand Cherokee seem to work quite effectively - they beep when a cyclist filters past me. So technology that works in that limited set of circumstances has been around for at least 10 years.
Beztweets discovered from the manufacturer that the range is 1.5 metres.
At 30 mph a car is travelling at 13.4112 metres per second.
Yes, I can see that working.
Probably more effective where there is stationary traffic and a cycle lane where the cabbie can't be arsed to look in the nearside mirror or over the shoulder to check it's clear before turning left, like what they should.
Won't the game be how many beeps did you get today?
One assumes that all taxi drivers are also happy to have trackers in the event that they are caught parking illegally, jumping red lights, breaking speed limits, making dangerous manouvres or generally driving illegally.
It's for their own good.
I think it's a terrible idea, which will lull the taxi drivers into a habit of not actually * looking * for cyclists.
The misapprehension being that you actually believe they look or indeed care about other road users now.
Well, you know, I try to give people the benefit of the doubt...
This is the sort of idea which should have been thrown out of Dragon's Den.
Are we now going to get another sentence in news reports when a cyclist has been run over - after the one telling us whether the person was wearing a helmet, one saying if they had an electronic tag?
If the driver of a taxi or any other vehicle can't see a person on a bike with their eyes, there's either a problem with the vehicle, or a problem with the driver.
Exactly. Why should cyclists have to use RFID to identify their presence? What's wrong with the Mark 1 eyeball?
Anyway, since not all cyclists will carry the tag, the taxi drivers will still have to use eyes'n'mirrors the same as they always did; so how does the tag really help???
Unless it does become another "cyclist run down because he wasn't wearing a tag and the taxi driver was playing candy crush saga (or filming traffic droid)"