CTC Forum - On the road

Syndicate content
Discussion boards hosted by CTC, the national cycling charity
Updated: 2 hours 27 min ago

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

2 hours 33 min ago
kwackers wrote:danhopgood wrote:No, no, no! I admit I like rules - and there are plenty of people out there that don't. But to suggest everyone just "does the right thing" is just mad given the state of the roads. Maybe in the outback in Oz. Not in central London, thank you. My view is we need to enforce the law as it stands - on all sides.
Having driven and ridden around London I can't say I know which version of the highway code is practised there. Certainly it isn't one I've read.

It's the "I'll do what I can get away with 'cos no-one's enforcing the rules" version, which is much less safe.

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

2 hours 48 min ago
are capable of doing over 30mph and I know they will do it in 30mph limits but you can not just give them tickets when they are not because you know they will.
In point of fact this very thing happened to me when I was a motorbike courier. However, I won't dwell on a 30 year-old sense of injustice as it would drive me mad I need to move on from it.

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

2 hours 51 min ago
danhopgood wrote:No, no, no! I admit I like rules - and there are plenty of people out there that don't. But to suggest everyone just "does the right thing" is just mad given the state of the roads. Maybe in the outback in Oz. Not in central London, thank you. My view is we need to enforce the law as it stands - on all sides.
Having driven and ridden around London I can't say I know which version of the highway code is practised there. Certainly it isn't one I've read.

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

2 hours 55 min ago
I know but you are only breaking the law when you are breaking it.

Cars are capable of doing over 30mph and I know they will do it in 30mph limits but you can not just give them tickets when they are not because you know they will.

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

3 hours 6 sec ago
It was a nice day wasnt it.

Street Lights are on as are the vehicle lights. Suggests to me that it is after lighting up time, so technically night & the camera may well be enhancing how much light there is available (I know mine does). In any case, you do know what I mean

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

3 hours 2 min ago
kwackers wrote:...............
As someone who has a more pragmatic viewpoint the only thing that really bothers me is "being too stupid in a built up area" because tbh if people actually engaged their brains all round not only would it be nicer out there but traffic would flow better and the majority of the highway code could be dispensed with.

No, no, no! I admit I like rules - and there are plenty of people out there that don't. But to suggest everyone just "does the right thing" is just mad given the state of the roads. Maybe in the outback in Oz. Not in central London, thank you. My view is we need to enforce the law as it stands - on all sides.

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

3 hours 5 min ago
beardy wrote: none of the cyclists visible have pedal reflectors!

It was a nice day wasnt it.

Beat me to it!!

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

3 hours 7 min ago
none of the cyclists visible have pedal reflectors!

It was a nice day wasnt it.

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

3 hours 12 min ago
There is a set of written rules for us all to obey, when people start choosing which ones they like (and ban others for disobeying) and which one they dont like they may find somebody else wants to ban them for breaking those laws.

The point is, if you look at the video, there are quite a large number of law breakers in the video: Not only the two guys well forward of the junction, the camera bike, the bloke on his left and the motor scooter all have their front wheels over the stop line: Horrifying as it may seem, none of the cyclists visible have pedal reflectors! However, if that was the only thing that mattered we wouldn't be sitting here dissecting the video. The fact is, both the lorry and the cyclist could both have offended in the way that they did and nothing would have happened if the cyclist had just paid attention to what he was doing. If he had set off when he did, eyeballed the lorry and stopped accelerating, there would have been no incident. I suggest that sort of scenario happens many times an hour in London and nobody bats an eyelid because nothing happens.

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

3 hours 34 min ago
which in turn assumes that others are both obeying them and driving in an alert and sensible way.

Well somebody has to start the ball rolling there, it may as well be me.

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

5 hours 2 min ago
Tonyf33 wrote:And at no point have I said the cyclist was without fault, just that the lorry was in the majority of fault here and was dangerous, according to 'Kwackers' it wasn't dangerous at all for the lorry to run a red light at such a busy intersection
As I pointed out both jumped red lights and only one ignored highway code advice about entering a junction that wasn't clear. I'd be interested in knowing how you square up the idea that the one with the least blame is actually the one who broke the most rules??

But you're right. In the instance above there's nothing particularly dangerous in what the lorry did, in theory you could have an entire procession of traffic for 10 minutes after the lights have changed and it wouldn't be dangerous - for normal folk. Obviously if you're blind and stupid then all bets are off.
Had the lorry not been part of a procession of traffic then it would have been dangerous but in the instance as shown it was simply an annoyance that was turned into danger by the stupidity of another.

Re: Where to cycle on semi-narrow lanes?

5 hours 2 min ago
Many lanes are roughly twice the width of a typical car, so cycling in primary position leaves an angry motorist room to push past on either side, just as long as they aren't bothered about leaving more than 3" of clearance.

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

5 hours 2 min ago
As has been said many times before crossing a red is not in itself a dangerous act. In fact the main reason for having traffic lights is to share out the use of the junction between both roads.

That doesnt stop crossing a red being a dangerous act on occasions just as pulling out from the minor road (without traffic lights) can be a dangerous act on occasions.

In this case the lorry driver may have been fully aware that there was gridlock and thought he could safely force his way through when it wasnt his right to do so. Being rammed by a cyclist who is setting off is not an everyday occurrence.

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

5 hours 7 min ago
Okay, it wasn't dangerous to anyone I'm sure the authorities across the land fully agree and past fines refunded due to it being a ridiculous notion that running a red light isn't dangerous..
that's truly enlightening.

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

5 hours 14 min ago
according to 'Kwackers' it wasn't dangerous at all for the lorry to run a red light at such a busy intersection

Because of the low speed that traffic was assumed to be doing, it was only dangerous if somebody was not looking where they were going.
However if there wasnt traffic stuck at the lights and some car was on the road the cyclist was on already doing 30mph and luckily had the lights change in front of them then the truck driver's actions may well have been lethal and nobody would blame anybody but him.

The difference here is that cyclists are seen as slow and able to stop easily, so it is quite safe to pull out in front of them. Which is pretty much accepted by most people, even cyclists it seems.

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

5 hours 20 min ago
Edwards wrote:The timing of the Traffic Lights changing does seem to be short. However that does not say the truck driver is not wrong.

If this is the standard of cycling not just by one but a good few cyclists in the film then I am not surprised that so many cyclists get killed in London.
<moderated>

This post has been moderated because it was a direct question to Tony. It was meant in jest and not to be taken seriously.
So I apologise if any offence was caused that was not the intention. I was trying to convey how embarrassing this incident must be for the cyclist. Especially if he is identified.
You can PM me your question if you're desperate to know the answer to it, I haven't being on so haven't seen it so can't be offended by it. Just don't be surprised if the answer isn't the one you're hoping for especially if it is a particularly obtuse and/or stupid question

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

5 hours 21 min ago
Ellieb wrote:2. The lorry was at the stop line when the light phase was already changing for the cyclists, given the width of the junction this would indicate that the lights had already being on red for a good 3-4 seconds and amber for longer.
3. The cyclist whilst beyond the stop line (as were many others) had not gone 'through' the lights or the junction before the lights went green.
Yes, but these aren't really facts are they. You don't know & I don't know how long the lights for the lorry have been red. If it is a good 3-4 seconds then both the taxi & the boris bike have also jumped the lights. You are just making a supposition and there is no evidence for it. Secondly: The cyclist has gone through the lights on red. Not only has he passed over the solid white line (which is what the legal offence technically is) but the light you can see is a repeater. It is the second of two lights with the first one being on the stop line mounted on the lamp post. If you want to be pedantic about it, if he isn't past the repeater while it is still on red & amber then he is inches away from doing so. So as people keep saying: They both jumped the lights.

My take on it is that what the lorry does is, sadly, not unusual and anyone riding in a large urban area will see motor vehicles doing that many times a day. It does not excuse what he does, It is still ilegal, but it is hardly out of the ordinary. What the cyclist does, however, is not what one might expect to see. To completely ignore a large vehicle, which is clearly continuing across the junction in plain view, just isn't 'normal'. It takes two to make an accident, but I know which of the two protagonists behaviour I am most surprised by.

Er, yes they REALLY are facts, it isn't supposition at all..Or are you suggesting that the light phase for the lorry would remain green whilst the light changes to green for the carriageway perpendicular to it (the one with the cyclists on it)?
If so then you don't understand light phase changes and the built in timings especially for wider junctions where it takes longer to get across, light phase changes that are designed around avoiding conflict between the traffic coming from different directions. Clearly you and others just can't accept that as actual real life..er FACTS
And what bit of point three isn't a fact, can you not see the still picture that I extruded from the video?
And at no point have I said the cyclist was without fault, just that the lorry was in the majority of fault here and was dangerous, according to 'Kwackers' it wasn't dangerous at all for the lorry to run a red light at such a busy intersection

Re: Where to cycle on semi-narrow lanes?

7 hours 8 min ago
If there isn't room to share comfortably at more than 20 or 30 mph, take the lane in a position where a car or larger motor vehicle cannot pass, or must use the next lane to pass. When the driver has slowed the vehicle, or stopped to wait for you, if it is safe to do so, move over and let them past. If it isn't safe, stick to the position until it is safe.

Parked cars can be useful, as they slow other traffic. Ride out, at least 'the width of a door and a little bit more', or take the lane. If it's parked up to become sinlge lane, ride right down the middle, as if you were driving a car.

However... don't play chicken. If a driver is behaving in an intimidating way, it may be wise to get out of the way. Similarly, if the vehicle comes too close without slowing, dive for cover. I've not had that sort of thing happen often; only once or twice that I can recall, but be wary for it.

If the road is winding, you may want to change position to improve your visibility round the bend. That means both your ability to see, and others' ability to see you.

p.s. ask for a copy of Cyclecraft for your next birthday

Re: Where to cycle on semi-narrow lanes?

7 hours 18 min ago
I came to the conclusion the OP was talking about urban traffic lanes not country lanes.

Re: Where to cycle on semi-narrow lanes?

7 hours 29 min ago
The OP describes a road approx 3.5 metres is how I took it.

Archive

  • Patron: Her Majesty The Queen
  • President: Jon Snow
  • Chief Executive: Paul Tuohy
  • Cyclists' Touring Club (CTC): A company limited by guarantee, registered in England no.25185. Registered as a charity in England and Wales No 1147607 and in Scotland No SC042541

Copyright © CTC 2015

Terms and Conditions