CTC Forum - On the road

Syndicate content
Discussion boards hosted by CTC, the national cycling charity
Updated: 1 hour 4 min ago

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

26 February 2015 - 11:51pm
landsurfer wrote:A terrible loss of life, and if SH is correct, and I don't doubt he is, wholly the fault of the cyclist.


No - it's the fault of the system that repeatedly fails to take human life seriously.

I'm not blaming the driver, but the drivers of such vehicles are ridiculously overrepresented in the statistics for serious injuries and death. That isn't this driver's fault, but it is a fact.

These vehicles are not safe on our roads in their current configuration, and with their current operating practices.

Something needs to change, and that is the place to start - as per any H&S issue, start at the dangerous machine, not the victim(s).
In this case (assuming the report up thread is accurate) the lady and driver are *both* victims, although to differing degrees.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

26 February 2015 - 11:37pm
Blame motorists for everything.... until we drive away in our car.

If I drove off in my car in the same way as those who I blame then I hope you would blame me too.

I continue to blame motorists when I am driving my car but have little problem with the cyclists that I meet. What is the worst they could do? Dent my wing? (which is rusty anyway).

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

26 February 2015 - 11:26pm
Often on this forum there seems to be a "blame all drivers of motorised vehicles" approach to life.
Then when the posters get off their high horse and put their bike onto the back of their car and drive off they are without blemish.
Has a poll been done ? What is the percentage of CTC members that drive a car... I suspect 90% plus...
A terrible loss of life, and if SH is correct, and I don't doubt he is, wholly the fault of the cyclist.
Absolutely of no comfort to the family, but as a 100k a year driver and very active cyclist the "us and them" approach of many on here is, frankly, a disgrace.
Blame motorists for everything.... until we drive away in our car.
I hope some one puts a "Ghost bike" at the scene, on my visits to Ulster they always make me think about the way I drive.
A pointless loss of life, my condolences for the family and also for the driver of the vehicle.
He didn't get up this morning planning to end a life.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

26 February 2015 - 10:30pm
The highway code also warns pedestrians who are using a zebra crossing to watch out for motorists who are overtaking the cars which have stopped to let them cross. That doesnt give cars the right to perform such a manoeuvre.

I dont know about cyclists but there isnt actually a law against overtaking on the left. So if pedestrians are being warned to watch out for cars performing illegal manoeuvres, it is quite reasonable to warn drivers about cyclists who may be performing acts which are legal but dont obey the highway code.

That doesnt actually make them sanctioned. I have never felt happy about the legitimacy of filtering on the inside, even though there is no law specifically banning it.

All of this is just when there isnt a marked cycle lane. It may be that the advice about watching for cyclists on the inside is justified because there are some roads where there is a marked cycle lane.

Re: Pinch points.

26 February 2015 - 10:26pm
Tonyf33 wrote:Constant mirror checking means you're not as focused on what's in front of you, ..........

To me a mirror on a bike makes no logical sense whatsoever if you're able to turn your head and be able to control your bike at the same time.


I'd say that doing a shoulder check takes longer than a glance at a mirror so a mirror gives me more time to focus on what is in front of me. I can check multiple mirrors in the cars and vans I drive while still keeping a proper watch to the front. I fail to see how using one mirror on my bike means my view to the front is compromised.


While you may make frequent shoulder checks most cyclists I see do not check over their shoulders unless changing lanes. So a mirror means more information. And I certainly don't move frequently left and back again. Doing that removes the advantage of a mirror as I always back up a mirror with a shoulder check when changing course both for my safety and to signal the change of course to following drivers. Typically when negotiating a series of pinch points I'll be in primary the whole way. No need to move left just to need another course change 50M further on.

Re: Pinch points.

26 February 2015 - 10:12pm
Unless you have neck problems mirrors are a waste of time IMO.
Constant mirror checking means you're not as focused on what's in front of you, you're more likely to be 'moving out the way' given the propensity for vehicles to come within X feet (where X is your particular comfort zone). Those with mirrors if acting on what they see from a distance back will be frequently moving left and back again or even doing the wait on the left before turning right manoeuvre.
To me a mirror on a bike makes no logical sense whatsoever if you're able to turn your head and be able to control your bike at the same time.

As for pinch points/pedestrian refuge's, they can be a pain, they are often put in places where it makes more sense to not have one and there is no other thought for vulnerable road users. One I pass daily has a footpath leading to it, it's rarely used because there are more direct and safer crossing points for pedestrians nearby yet this pinch point has caused a great deal of alarm in the past when it was first put in place with vehicles wanting to cut right in at last second or right on your 'arris
The problem is that the road (40mph limit) is quite wide on both sides, lots of space for HGVs to come past but at the pinch point it narrows anyway and vehicles have to slow in any case as it's not far from an oval 'roundabout'. I've learnt to boss the road at an early point to make my intentions absolutely clear, in fact I take a right of centre position on the carriageway to make it look even less possible to make an overtake.

Re: Question About cycle Lane Signs/Use Mandatory/Advisory

26 February 2015 - 10:06pm
Cyclists are banned from special roads (official term for motorways) or rather they aren't banned but they aren't on the list of allowed vehicle types.

Most special roads are motorways but some in rare cases are A roads like the A1 near Edinburgh. In this case the cycling prohibition is explicitly signed.

Re: Question About cycle Lane Signs/Use Mandatory/Advisory

26 February 2015 - 10:02pm
In my part of Manchester there are some solid white line bounded cycle lanes which are not enforced and cars park on them all the time.

When I asked why this was a councillor told me there was never any intention to enforce them.

Of course, the council did charge me and other council tax payers for the job of painting them even though doing so was utterly pointless.

Re: Pinch points.

26 February 2015 - 9:55pm
661-Pete wrote:In France, where I frequently visit, these isolated pairs of bollards are much less common, instead you're more likely to encounter elongated 'islands' between the lanes, like here. Normally when cycling, it would make no difference whether you stayed in primary or secondary - the following motorist would just have to hold back!

But of course, in France, most cyclists are held in greater respect than their British counterparts. I wonder why?

I saw in Nantes this summer quite a few pinch points like the OP but the French have at least mitigated the problem by painting a half dozen bike icons through the centre of the pinch, in primary. I know we have to be wary of the supposed magic of paint but at least it does tell everyone, motorist and cyclist alike, that bikes are expected to use primary. And it costs nothing.

For example

Re: Pinch points.

26 February 2015 - 8:25pm
Kwackers
Like other's have said hold primary when you need to,it is a battle of wills,it shouldn't be but it is and I'll bet you pass the vast majority of those close overtakers at the jam they're collected in at the junction.
If they're being stupid I usually stop and have quiet word,if they get bolshie at least they've been told.

On the RVM thing,I wouldn't ride without one these days,not only can you keep an eye on traffic behind even when you can't hear them,for whatever reason,but because I can see them they know I can if I move my head slightly when I'm using it.
Mine's one of these:- http://www.wiggle.co.uk/cateye-bm-300g- ... 60051862uk
Sticking out on the end of drops,so it adds a leettle more width,not much but psychologically to a driver from behind the bike looks wider,every little helps

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

26 February 2015 - 6:39pm
Beardy, for that particular reference I think you're correct, but there are other references to cyclists passing on the inside elsewhere in the Highway Code. The link I posted earlier was an attempt to highlight how the law interprets what the Highway Code says. There are references there to vehicles "going down the inside" - and the conclusion seems to be going down either side is a "manoeuvre fraught with danger" and the overtaking vehicle is likely to be found at least partly at fault if something goes wrong.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

26 February 2015 - 6:17pm
mjr wrote:beardy wrote:As a driver I can cope with watching my front, my back and my right hand side but I have not managed to watch everywhere successfully, the left side is traditionally the one that you feel safe about. It is after all against the highway code to overtake on that side.
Please reread it:
Rule 163 wrote:stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues. If the queue on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on the left




My comment was about undertaking within the same lane, I have repeatedly said it could be different with separate lanes. Your quote from the highway code is about traffic in separate lanes.

So please cut out the condescending "Please reread it" comments.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

26 February 2015 - 6:08pm
I think you're missing an important one - design and operation of large vehicles in public places

Re: Cyclists are treated as if they are staionary.

26 February 2015 - 5:47pm
And the worst ones are those with rear wheel steering. Had a close shave with one of these years ago so now i start braking as soon as the cab is past me if i get overtaken by one.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

26 February 2015 - 5:47pm
I'm leaving this thread now. I think it has served its purpose of allowing us to air our views on this terrible event. Thank you to everyone who has exchanged views with me. As a final post I will list in no particular order a few areas that I think need looking at to make things safer for cyclists at busy road junctions.

1) Infrastructure for cyclists on the road
2) Alternatives to being on the road (where practicable)
3) Careful driving
4) Careful cycling

I think anyone hoping to produce long term improvements must look at all those headings.

Bye

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

26 February 2015 - 5:44pm
beardy wrote:As a driver I can cope with watching my front, my back and my right hand side but I have not managed to watch everywhere successfully, the left side is traditionally the one that you feel safe about. It is after all against the highway code to overtake on that side.
Please reread it:
Rule 163 wrote:stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues. If the queue on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on the left

There's also the not so small matter of scofflaws.
I am carrying on from XAPBob's starting point of analysing the problem and possible solutions and thinking through them, which, I understand, is not quite in line with the thinking of those who have already decided the best answer and are just trying to convince others who have already decided on a contradictory best answer.
Well, I think the best answer is to change the awful road layout at Bressenden Place and take steps to ensure it is never replicated again. That doesn't contradict the overtaking law change idea, but independently of road layouts, I think outlawing left-side overtakes would probably be a net harm.

danhopgood's link looks like it concerns liability rather than traffic offences but it's still interesting.

Re: Pinch points.

26 February 2015 - 5:41pm
beardy wrote:I suppose it would be a complete waste of time to point out Highway code rule 153 which states they should not be overtaking in a traffic calming area. I am sure that even the Police will say well "it was only a cycle".

http://www.highwaycode.info/rule/153
Does the pinch point count as traffic calming? It doesn't restrict the flow to a single lane so doesn't 'look' like the rule might apply... I'm just guessing here.

Re: Pinch points.

26 February 2015 - 5:35pm
I suppose it would be a complete waste of time to point out Highway code rule 153 which states they should not be overtaking in a traffic calming area. I am sure that even the Police will say well "it was only a cycle".

http://www.highwaycode.info/rule/153

Re: Pinch points.

26 February 2015 - 5:23pm
gaz wrote:Call for more comprehensive traffic calming measures, e.g.Ringlestone.

In the meantime carry on with what you are already doing.I've never seen traffic calming like that. It no doubt works, but it looks like it's on a gradient to me. If so and you are a slow cyclist, I'm sure there might be a tailback of slow moving motor vehicles and no doubt cursing drivers or even bus passengers. Interested to know what happens in practice.
In Forest Row some of the pedestrian crossings are on humps http://goo.gl/maps/EDjkf. These do not seem a problem to cycle over, but give quite a jolt to cars travelling more than 25mph.

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