Feed aggregator

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

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 4:17pm
Special roads are interesting because they work on the exact opposite principle to the rest of the road network, types of traffic have to be specifically included in the order whereas elsewhere you may use a road unless you are prohibited by an order. The motorway sign is itself a prohibition sign for non-motorway traffic. All non-motorway special roads should have their prohibitions explicitly signed. Incidentally there is nothing stopping a special road from allowing pedestrians or cyclists. The right to walk and cycle across the Severn Bridge was created in exactly that way.

All very interesting but we're complicating things too much. The simple answer is that you can cycle anywhere there isn't a motorway or prohibition sign telling you that you can't. To answer Valbrona's question, no roads other than motorways carry an automatic prohibition of cycling. The term "Expressway" is used infrequently in the names of roads in the UK but it does not have an official meaning. Some are motorways, others special roads, others all purpose roads

In addition to what everyone else has said about cycle lanes, mandatory ones should be backed up by an order prohibiting motor traffic entering them which should also prohibit parking, they might also prohibit loading though many don't. In the case where somebody has just drawn a solid line without a properly made order to back it up the lane is effectively only advisory.

Re: Weight distribution.

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 27 February 2015 - 4:13pm
I've used front panniers on a couple of tours. I like the way they spread the weight and generally my touring bike handles well.
The drawback I found was when I came to roadworks in Bagneres de Bigorre last year. I found myself sharing a narrow newly laid section with lorries and decided to move to the adjacent footpath - all was ok until my left pannier caught on an ornamental planter. That rotated the front wheel and caused me to fall heavily. One of the road repair crew kindly helped me up but I'd pulled muscles in my back which made cycling uphill very painful. Put paid to my planned route.
I don't think a rear pannier would have caused the same occurence.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 1:41pm
Oh FFS!
As far as we can presently tell, this cyclist (and possibly others who have ended up KSI'd) has cycled past the left hand side of a large vehicle, possibly as it was about to move. This is a Bad Idea.

95%+ (made up figure from m experience of cycle lanes over 50 years) of on-road cycle lanes take cyclists up the inside of vehicles - whether or not they are moving / about to move. Clearly then people have " died as the result of "following the advice from our traffic planning professionals as seen commonly painted on the roads."".

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 1:31pm
pwa wrote:Both at fault there, I would say....
+1
pwa wrote:...Very lucky outcome.
+1

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 1:26pm
pwa wrote:Both at fault there, I would say. The cyclist was too quick off the mark and not alert to the possibility of someone coming from the left on a (very) mature amber. Poor survival skills. He also went over what is a pedestrian crossing on amber (minor technical infringement).

The lorry driver was very naughty, failing to stop on a late amber or a red.

Very lucky outcome.

That's my take on it too.

It just goes to show why the bigger vehicle should have a higher duty of care.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 1:11pm
[XAP]Bob wrote:Yay - we've gone back to the wrong end of the H&S debate again.

....the general cycling public, which may not be native to this country, should not suffer death for following the advice from our traffic planning professionals as seen commonly painted on the roads.

So let's actually address the source of the problem, and that's not the lady in question.

Um, and where's the evidence that anyone's died as the result of "following the advice from our traffic planning professionals as seen commonly painted on the roads."?

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 1:08pm
[XAP]Bob wrote:So let's actually address the source of the problem, and that's not the lady in question

And while you do that another person might be killed because a simple piece of advice that corresponds to the roads as they are now is ignored by some. That advise is

Do not cycle down the same side of vehicles that are indicating that direction. Especially the side opposite the driver.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 1:02pm
Yay - we've gone back to the wrong end of the H&S debate again.

Can someone chop a load off the bottom of this thread and then lock it.

Cycling down the left of a long vehicle isn't a good idea, I think we all agree on that.
However the general cycling public, which may not be native to this country, should not suffer death for following the advice from our traffic planning professionals as seen commonly painted on the roads.

So let's actually address the source of the problem, and that's not the lady in question.

Re: faroe islands anyone toured there, how did you get there

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 27 February 2015 - 12:51pm
The time to be in the Faroes is on the 20th March this year for the total eclipse. Of course the chances of it being clear are remote I suspect!

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 12:28pm
Interestingly there is nothing I can spot in there that directly challenges my interpretation of the rules

http://www.cyclescheme.co.uk/community/how-to/filtering

In some circumstances, you can even pass on the left
Yes when the car infront is indicating right.

Overtake on the kerb side only if the traffic is stationary and there's no room on the right-hand side.
Is overtaking a stationary vehicle subject to the same rules as a moving vehicle? There are exceptions to overtaking stationary vehicles compared to moving vehicles all through the highway code and law.
Approaching zebra crossings, double white lines.

My impression is that cyclists have taken a "right" to overtake on the inside despite the law forbidding it and hope to eventually win it through government acquiescence. They are nearly there but I dont accept they are there yet until it is put truly to the test. That advice rather cleverly keeps within the written rules yet doesnt challenge the cyclists assertion either.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 12:09pm
mjr wrote:That quote from highway code says queues not lanes. As others have pointed out, there are other places where filtering is expected. I'll stop suggesting rereading it once people stop appearing to reword it to mean what they think.

The closest we've currently got to an official rider training manual is the Bikeability Delivery Guide and Level 3 includes filtering, opening with "Upon encountering queuing traffic, the trainee may pass it (on the right or left) or may choose to wait in the queue" and there is a later caution against passing long vehicles on the left.

Another official publication, Cyclecraft, includes filtering on chapter 11 if you've got a copy. It's not online, but http://www.cyclescheme.co.uk/community/how-to/filtering references it and contains similar advice - there is a big warning about left-hand overtakes, but basically advice on how to do it.

Cyclecraft is a TSO publication, and the official DfT guide on cycling.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 12:04pm
That quote from highway code says queues not lanes

That quote says queues and lanes and in the context of the whole clause it reads to me that those queues are in different lanes which is why lanes are mentioned at the start of it. To back that up look at the clause just before it.
Now how can that be interpreted differently?

:only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so
: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

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 11:56am
beardy wrote:mjr wrote: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.
That quote from highway code says queues not lanes. As others have pointed out, there are other places where filtering is expected. I'll stop suggesting rereading it once people stop appearing to reword it to mean what they think.

The closest we've currently got to an official rider training manual is the Bikeability Delivery Guide and Level 3 includes filtering, opening with "Upon encountering queuing traffic, the trainee may pass it (on the right or left) or may choose to wait in the queue" and there is a later caution against passing long vehicles on the left.

Another official publication, Cyclecraft, includes filtering on chapter 11 if you've got a copy. It's not online, but http://www.cyclescheme.co.uk/community/how-to/filtering references it and contains similar advice - there is a big warning about left-hand overtakes, but basically advice on how to do it.

In short, left-side overtaking is normal and widespread and has been taught to people for years, as well as the associated infrastructure encouraging it with narrow left-side lanes. Even if outlawed immediately (which I think is politically improbable as described before), it wouldn't stop overnight because it would take ages to retrain people (including changing all the official publications) and the afflicted junctions won't be rebuilt any quicker than if we rebuild them with proper infrastructure... so let's just redesign and rebuild them to make it unnecessary. It'll be quicker and fairer.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 11:46am
How about this one

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=Carmar ... 9,,0,22.76

though this one could be called on the inside

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.85510 ... BbIK1Q!2e0

One thing that they both have in common is that you could not possible ride in them if there were cars there for you to filter past as the cars would be filling the space themselves.

edit: some link problems now fixed.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 11:34am
Highway engineers put silly narrow cycle lanes on the inside. They put ASL lead-ins on the inside. They put access points to shared infrastucture on the inside. And they do these things on streets where congestion is normal. That implies not only permission, but an *expectation* that cyclists will filter on the inside.

On every ASL, I've ever seen, the only legal point to enter it is on the inside. If cyclists can't do that, as the law currently stands, there is no point in ASLs.

Re: Pinch points.

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 11:34am
kwackers wrote:IMO whilst I like having a mirror I'm more than a little doubtful of how useful they actually are when it comes to preventing accidents. They're not actually that great at even telling you how close someone will pass IMO.

But they do tell you that a driver IS moving out or that a driver is waiting rather than squeezing between me and an oncoming car. The bottom line is I don't like blindly trusting my life to overtaking drivers. With a mirror I can watch them. Having more information about other road user's actions is a good thing.


I agree that most of the time it doesn't matter. It only has to prevent one crash to be worthwhile though. My mirror once saved me from being hit by a large American camper van that went through my roadspace at 60mph. The only reason I wasn't hit was I went off the road onto the adjacent gravel/sand/desert surface. In the UK It has alerted me to a few punishment overtakes before they happened and let me drift left to turn them into comfortable overtakes. Maybe not prevented any hits. I don't see a downside to using a mirror though so why not?

Re: Brakes work, shame brain doesn't

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 11:27am
661-Pete wrote:"I always look both ways, even when there's a green light..."

I'm in that club too.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 11:21am
AlaninWales 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.
Frankly that is very worrying and I urge you to take further driver training in observation skills. RoSPA are very good at this.
As for the Highway Code:
Highway Code UK wrote:88

Manoeuvring. You should be aware of what is behind and to the sides before manoeuvring. Look behind you; use mirrors if they are fitted. When in traffic queues look out for pedestrians crossing between vehicles and vehicles emerging from junctions or changing lanes. Position yourself so that drivers in front can see you in their mirrors. Additionally, when filtering in slow-moving traffic, take care and keep your speed low.
Highway Code UK wrote:160
Once moving you should
...
be aware of other road users, especially cycles and motorcycles who may be filtering through the traffic. These are more difficult to see than larger vehicles and their riders are particularly vulnerable. Give them plenty of room, especially if you are driving a long vehicle or towing a trailer
Specific permission for motorcycles to filter, specific instructions for others to watch out for cyclists and motorcyclists filtering: You should indeed be expecting them on all sides; I certainly do.

I find it really, really sad that others here are still playing a 'blame game' (that's you landsurfer). Given the discussion direction that is a particularly vicious, nasty and disrespectful type of 'straw man'.

Well this is just plain insulting to suggest that somebody should take extra training because they do not see things the same way as you do.

You know from other posts that I am a very experienced high mileage road user with an accident free record decades long. I can not watch four screens simultaneously adequately well at the same time as performing a function, it is about time more people admitted to their human limitations.

Yes motorcycles are allowed to filter but it doesnt say they are allowed to filter on the inside.

Re: Pinch points.

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 11:10am
reohn2 wrote:ArMoRothair wrote: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

IME,there isn't the aggression toward cyclists and other vulnerable road users that there is in the UK,it seems to be a much more people centric society,even though car use is equal to the UK's

In this area the authorities have done a lot of things that they consider to favour cyclists, but often just managing to put them in danger. This is a case in point. These things give motorists the impression that it's safe to enter the chicane while the cyclist is in the mini cycle-lane provided, but if the cyclist exits the lane while the car is still be in the pinch, the car is directed at the cyclist.

The one in my example is relatively wide-spaced and well-maintained, but in most villages they're tighter and the cycling part never gets swept and is full of forty kinds of débris.

I always take prime position and to hell with it.

These chicanes have become pretty well standard here over the last five years. A while back I was at an award presentation involving the regional council, and their safety officer asked me in a rather hearty fashion if I thought they could do anything more to help cyclists. My reply was "yes, get rid of all these new pinch points, they're deadly". End of conversation.

Re: Pinch points.

CTC Forum - On the road - 27 February 2015 - 10:59am
Kwackers, as others have said (and you are experienced enough to know) there is nothing that will stop idiots driving like idiots; I feel for you (been there etc).

The things I have found help in these situations have been:
- Ride slightly wider than the usual primary (obviously not wide enough to encourage them to try to pass inside and push you onto the islands)
- Flat bars rather than drops (I use bar ends to give a varied hand position) with no end stops (grazed and rusty ends on a commuter steed help too)
- Wobble to increase your apparent width - not a wheel wobble, but the kind sometimes used hill climbing: Swing those flat bars in an inverted pendulum, this really worries the overtakers.
Syndicate content

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