Safe Speed Forums

The scenario: A PeLiCon Crossing in the middle of a small town. It is on a straight piece of road , 30mph limit, with a clear view of 100meters in each direction. A pedestrian, let us call him Dave, wants to cross the road. He observes in the distance a car approaching at a speed which he estimates to be below the speed limit. Should Dave

a) Cross the road without activating the crossing, keeping a close eye on the approaching traffic ready to take evasive action if necessary
b) Press the button, wait for the green man before crossing and give a cheery wave to the car which has stopped at its red light.
c) Press the button and cross the road immediately without looking at the traffic. The motorist will then stop for thirty seconds at the red light, contemplating the pedestrian free crossing.

I would adopt strategy (a). My wife, however,insists that this sets a bad example to children and uses strategy (b). Most pedestrians adopt strategy (c). What do you do?

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Cross somehwere other than the crossing where safe to do so....

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

If he knows he can managed it: a (this is the same as crossing a road without use of a crossing)
If he isn't sure: b
If anyone ever uses C "cross the road immediately without looking at the traffic", they need educating sharpish. This also applies at Zebra crossings.

What exactly does "The motorist will then stop for thirty seconds at the red light, contemplating the pedestrian free crossing." mean? Do all motorists always do this? Does it even matter?


Interesting; needless to say I am sceptical. Can you reference this?
If this is true then our road safety policy truly has failed us.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

The original PELICAN crossings are OK where the lights go red and allow pedestrians to cross very soon changing to flashing amber to keep the traffic moving where pedestrians are " light ". Its the latest PUFFIN and TOUCAN ( one of them has something to do with cyclists but not sure which one ) crossings which do my head in, just a red light on for absolutely ages causing extra unnecessary congestion to build up in the time difference between the PELICAN average flashing amber period.

Toucan = Two Can (use the crossing). Pedestrians and cyclists. It is legal nonsense as cyclists seem perfectly capable of using Pelicans. (Pelican = Pelicon = Pedestrian Light Control.)
Puffin = You'll be huffin' and Puffin' at the amount of time wasted by the damned things. Both crossing them and driving past them I have found them to be a pile of poo.

The approach I would take would be something like...
Is there a reasonable gap in which I can cross now without danger to myself or causing anyone using the road to have to slow down? If not, does it look like there'll be one soon? If not then I'd use the crossing, otherwise I would cross when it was safe. No point wasting my time waiting for a crossing when I could continue walking and cross later, and no point wasting anyone else's time.
I don't see that numeric speed restrictions come into it at all.

_________________
Andrew.

What I mean is: if the pedestrian pushes the button and then crosses on the red man the lights will change after has crossed. The car will then be stopped by the red light despite the fact that no one wants to cross the road. The vast majority of motorists do obey red lights even when they are pointless. It matter because it wastes the driver's time (despite my pro-pedestrian stance I do have sympathy with this), creates congestion and pollution.



Missed the smiley. Sorry. That was a joke - invoking Murph's law.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Do you give any credence to my wife's view that crossing on red sets a bad example to children? This board has often stressed the need to teach children the safe way to cross the road and a lesson by example is the best lesson.


I would be less inclined to cross against the red man where traffic was travelling at 80+mph but, I don't think they have PeLiCon crossings on NSL roads.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

I think I do. It may be that some parents of minors aren't convinced their offspring aren't yet capable of crossing the road and believe these tools will greatly aid their safety when crossing by themselves.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

To my mind the problem with pelicans is that (for the most part) the timings are all wrong. What SHOULD happen (IMHO) is this

Pedestrian presses button. Unless the lights have cycled recently they should IMMEDIATLY change in favour of the pedestrian.

The green should be just long enough to allow somebody to smartly cross the road

The flashing amber should be rather longer to allow for very young very old and infirm.

Unfortunatly, more often than not, pedestrians ae made to wait sometimes quite a long time after making a request to cross. as a result a gap often appears to allow a crossing to be made before the ights begin to cycle resulting in an unnececary red!

(Of course, if we have a BUSY crossing then there has to be a minimum time period between light cycles but frequently pedestrians are made to wait even if the crossing hasnt been used for a while.. Why??)

Personally (though I do it myself) crossing a pelican with the lights against me seems to me to be highly dangerous. Drivers approaching the crossing will be looking at the lights, not the pedestrian, and if the pedestrian misjudges the gap s/he will be much more likly to be hit.

(I am wondring if something like this happened in the accident involving the unlicenced biker in another curret thread)

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

Hmm. I'm not sure. I would prefer children to be taught how to cross the road safely, and that a crossing can help them if they need that help.
Teaching children to 'follow rules' just because someone wrote them on a bit of paper is not a good idea. I prefer "always question anyone who calls themselves an authority".


So if they were doing 80mph down this road which had a 30mph speed restriction on... Numeric restrictions are irrelevant, the actual level of traffic at the time is what is important.


Really? I look for ... well not just pedestrians but anything which might happen to appear in my path.
I don't really care what colour lights are showing where, if someone looks like they are about to appear in my path I'll try to be able to stop before hitting them. And that goes no matter what form of transport they or I are using.

_________________
Andrew.

Quote:

Really? I look for ... well not just pedestrians but anything which might happen to appear in my path.
I don't really care what colour lights are showing where, if someone looks like they are about to appear in my path I'll try to be able to stop before hitting them. And that goes no matter what form of transport they or I are using.

Sooo! on those occasions when you "Jaywalk" accross Pelicon crossings (or any other light controled crossings with a pedestrian phase that is against you and in favour of the traffic) You do so in full confidence that the drivers are directing all their attention at you and not the lights?

Even when there is a red light camera present?

Do you?

Really???

I dont!

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

No. that is why I said "keeping a close eye on the approaching traffic ready to take evasive action if necessary"

The reason I "jaywalk" in the circumstances is to improve the flow of traffic. Curious behaviour for one who carries an anti-motorist label but it does also cut down on unnecessary pollution

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

I normally cross in the way that DCB describes except that by checking the road is safe to cross I do not have to take evasive action.

I too have observed that many people seem to use option c. I have tried to educate some of our friends, who walk up to a crossing and just press the button, then with no cars coming just walk across meaning that vehicles are then left waiting at a red light for no reason, one of my pet hates.

Another observation is the number of people that just walk across without first checking vehicles have stopped. I am a firm believer that the best way of staying safe is to look after your own safety and not rely on other people.

Whynot

The best way for safety is for me to look after myself and for other people to look out for me. Then it needs two errors before harm befalls.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

a.

As for the example thing, I would rather children were taught to look out for cars over and above being taught to cross only on the green man.

The next vehicle's driver/rider could be blind/drunk/stoned/whatever and not even notice the crossing.

The more levels of safety there are generally the fewer problems, up to a point. But where is the primary safety level? Currently we appear to be going toward the driver as having the primary responsibility for all safety.

While it is good that drivers are being made aware of their responsibility toward other road users it can break down under the current view. Two or more demands for that responsibility at the same time can lead to unfortunate results.

IMV the individual must take primary responsibility for themselves and ask assistance from others to maintain that safety. If third parties will not assist they should wait until such times as it is given.

[/quote]

That is because they have much more potential to cause harm and because they are trained and tested.

If it were legal and common practice to carry guns, as it is in parts of the world, how would you apportion responsibility for accidental gunshot injuries between the injured party and the gun slinger?

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

But surely a pedestrian crossing a busy road in front of a moving car, without taking sufficient precautions, is just as dangerous as walking onto a firing range, when in use. Would you do that and expect the "shooters" to be responsible? I wouldn't.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

A much better anology than mine. I withdraw

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown