Safe Speed Forums

I hope you have a cap, so you can doff it as the motorised vehicles pass you, you lentil munching shower dodging road fund evading socialist!

How about in the context of our road system being used by motorcyclists, cyclists, car drivers etc...

Except there is no cycling equivalent for: licenses and potential for their revocation, ANPR cameras and VRMs, speed/red light/bus lane/box junction camera enforcement, traffic wardens, clamping, towing...


None are indeed "squeaky clean". However, given your earlier comment of: "Crossing a red light without infringing on the crossing traffic is on a par with a motorist doing 35mph in a 30limit on a clear road. A technical offence which does no harm." (which I agree with), it does make one wonder why so much more (unchecked) vitriol on forums where the primary mode of transport is by bicycle.


abase: "cause to feel shame; hurt the pride of"

If you really believe that is the right word, then I'll just leave it open.



Now I could respond with: I've already stated that taking PP doesn't necessarily mean "obstructing other road users"; you can find that post for yourself if you want proof. However, that bar is too low for my liking, so I think I will simply leave that one where it is.


Unless someone demonstrates they actually want to forward the debate, I don't think there is any need to further this thread.
I've seen all the true colours (and failed arguments) I needed to see.

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

Cycles are regularly removed from railings, and certainly the city of london tags bikes and removes then if they've been left there.

Police are regularly seen speed checking cyclists with cameras in the royal parks and issuing notices.

And remind me, how many people are killed by cyclists each year?

Depends what you mean by obstructing I figure. Robin for one has appeared to have taken the "if I have to slow down or change my path at all you are obstructing me" line.

This is true, but that takes effect in a tiny fraction of the country; there's generally no such risk outside of the larger cities.


What is the percentage of the net road length in royal parks, against the rest of the country?

I did a few laps around Richmond park last year. Not only did I never see such enforcement, there were plenty of riders exceeding the 20 limit too. Damned speeders


Is it right to consider risk without accounting for exposure?
What is the weighting pro-rata (net distance travelled) ? 3000? Higher?

In terms of enforcement: the playing field will be much more levelled if cyclists are issues with licenses to ride (and penalised if caught riding without), bikes had visible ID markers, and there were cameras to catch those riding: on pavements, without lights at night, without helmets.
PS: I don't call for any of these, even if it does save a life...



There is at least some merit to that. It has always been a tenet of good driving that no one should do anything that forces another to change direction or speed; this works both ways and goes for both groups of road users.
I won't assume how far RX wished to go with that.

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

Really, so you never slow down to turn your car (forcing the car behind you to slow).

By extension, I presume you or Robin have never stuck your nose out of junction either?

That's exactly right weepej!
Again your pointless pedantry wins you respect and your argument merit.

In such cases, I indicate my intentions so following drivers can choose to slow in advance, instead of being forced to when needed.

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

Most slow moving vehicles have no choice but to take up a certain amount of room in their lane. For a cyclist to 'deliberately' (misguided reasons or specific) choose to remain in an 'out position', on the road is usually by choice (bar obstacles). A slow vehicle will often (28 following vehicles and they must) pull over, and allow others to pass, many even toot a TY.
There is an element of 'reasonable' allowance shown and given, as they are not trying to be awkward or difficult it is just that their vehicle is slow, and so we show courtesy and understanding.
A suggestion that a cyclist should choose to be in the centre area of a lane (as many of the links in this thread showed/encouraged), and a 'reason' is where this controversy arises, and so the choices by these road user groups are not the same.
When we need to inform of our presence taking up a greater physical space helps to promote that, but the disadvantage is that the exposure to danger is far greater. To travel along 'minding one's own business', although 'submissive' it is safe and mostly secure, to travel un-noticed and with no interference can be a good thing and even great skill.
That is a very interesting comment. No one who is out of the way of traffic can be in danger, so how is it that you are being 'compromised' exactly?
Also another interesting comment. A cyclist, who is at the edge of road, is not really 'inviting' anything (and believe me I do understand position controls), you are purely in a sensible and responsible road user position that is both predictable and safe. Other vehicles will expect you to be overtaken, and it will be carried out almost always, perfectly safely. The concept that you 'allow' someone by implies that you have governance over them and you do not, as each road user is responsible for themselves. To imply too that many will squeeze past and at speed is not either what I have experienced and if it was insufficient space then with the implication of the regularity then you would probably be in hospital or dead from all these incidents. Could it be that this is a fear based impression than having any resemblance to reality?
To imply that it is a bad position to allow traffic to pass is highly questionable. If it is not every road users responsibility to show courtesy and responsibility on the road and allow each other to overtake what sort of mayhem will the roads become when everyone starts to decide to 'rule the road position' above another ?
Of course a vehicle needs to pass by you, they travel at a greater speed (usually) you want them gone and out of your way, since when is it now considered a good idea to potentially block another road user ? Frustration Causes Accidents Allow Overtaking is a sign regularly seen on the roads of today.
Again it is good to help others to overtake of course, but I am very concerned that some cyclists might think that they can start to attempt to control traffic when not only many will be unaware of these new cyclist 'powers' but be so unpredictable that many will get it wrong and die because of it.
I wonder if the person / people who thought of this do not like cyclists ?

The 1st option - if at the front of the queue at the n/s curb keep front wheel on white line and probably ahead of the lorry and as soon as the lights change after checking all is clear go off as briskly as possible, but allowing for the lorry to set off quickly.
The 2nd option - is that if there is enough room and the indicator remains on, on the lorry, then move to the right side of the lorry and so allow the lorry a clear path to go and you a clear ahead path that fails to interfere with the lorry.
The 3rd option - if I was at all seriously concerned then I might get off the bike, walk over the red-lighted junction at safe times then when back on the road after the junction get back on the bike and carry on.

If I was a 3rd or 4th bike back then I would probably wait for the lorry to make his turn and stay way out of his way and then go when safe to do so. I have no problem waiting for him to turn not any other vehicle either.
If I was in my car and a cyclist came up alongside me and I was indicating left, then I would expect to have to wait for him/her to go before I could do my left turn safely. If they waited and indicated that I could go I would do so when legal and safe especially checking for any cyclists that were not waiting.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Well looking at some of the links there is a serious suggestion that (esp from the US link waaaay back in this thread now) that does suggest that taking the dominant position is 'safer'. So the implication is that whilst perhaps not absolutely 100% it does imply 'mostly' from what I saw and read.
I can't say that I relate to this 'PP'. I can totally however understand the need in whatever transport device to ensure one's safety and that can sometimes occasionally mean that we might need to move a little to gain a little space for safety, but as soon as that specific danger is gone return immediately to a normal position (edge of road) so as not to inconvenience all or any road users, whether another cyclist all the way up to huge lorries.
now this is an interesting comment. On one hand taken more literally, it would imply to do something for the 'sake' of being noticed - and the comment many might make (or may do as I am still catching up with this thread - sorry chaps), is that reflective clothing and keeping out of people's way but remaining safe is sensible and responsible. To deliberately choose a position to have no other effect than force others around you is taking this PP position way out of context. Subtle small space increase very temporarily is one thing, and yes your activity is 'felt' and then forgiven as a 'danger threaten, but the cyclist then returns to their 'safe zone'. But this action to deliberately move far out into a road, to simply be 'seen and felt', might cause anger and frustration, so surely any good cyclist would not wish to do this to another?
Is this a good idea? Humm I have some grave doubts. It could so easily be mistaken as a deliberate attempt to upset another road user, who is totally unaware of this 'new' idea, certainly it is news to me.
Positioning in any subtle way can have small effects to others as well as dramatic (and everything inbetween), so how do you know how someone else is going to react to your most definite action? As a cyclist taking that very dominate stance is not advisable from a personal safety (might upset someone and cause un-necessary upset and even anger toward me), to my action being mis-interpreted, or someone who might over-react or even simply seeing me too late. A person cycling on a fast road as the US website shows was in grave danger had she not had the vehicle accompanying her, and even then she upset many vehicles that never in their life expected to see such a foolhardy position from a cyclist. She too seemed too scarred to even look up the slip lane and never once looked behind her - why ? Too scarred is my guess.
Subtle movements, subtle 'controls' to help vehicles leave you more space - yes absolutely and even momentary movements off the road too to help other vehicles, and indeed as many other road users leave space for me (us cyclists) too when at lights etc.
Yep sure when nothing is about you can take a good 2ft distance from the curb or further out to have a great full use of road position, but always considering and ready to move back to the roadside when other traffic is encountered.
Whilst the facts only show a part of that - more boys than girls are filled on bikes. It is incorrect to make a suggestion that may or may not be down to the girls positioning. Until further analysis of each killed incident is looked at that is conjecture not fact.
I seriously would take issue with anyone who had some kind of axe against any other road user and we would debate it and hope to sort such non-sense out. Many are perhaps reading too much into some general comments but I have not seen this, can you point me to something where you might think this is true please ?
There has been a sad segregation of road users over the recent decade or so and much more needs to be done to ensure this rift is reduced. I cannot see that one group attempting to take a dominant stance is going to aid that whatsoever. Great 'fear' seems to be being pushed to the fore, and I ask myself 'why'?
Why should I as a cyclist fear traffic, I have spent years successfully navigating along London roads without incident, so why should I feel the need to step up or alter my 'position' to now suddenly be 'safe'? I was safe then and I was no or little bother to others, so why the need to change good cycling road user behaviours ?
So let me ask you - when you ride a bike what percentage of time do you feel scared ?

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Thank you for the detailed response and the most useful link to google streetmap which is terribly telling !
I think I know what happened. have you ever driven a big truck ? I have and in looking at that road that he approached the ra, it has a narrow slightly curved entrance to the ra, now that means that he is highly lightly to have been downshifting (slowly by perception) through the gears to get a good 'off' if all is clear. He will likely have been throwing glances to his right. As he is flicking bet gears and glances, you might have caught a coming or going glance, and most crucially look how that very large sign is placed ! Precisely in his line of sight, exactly where you will have been this is I am pretty sure a SMIDSY (sorry mate I didn't see you) event. There is no way he could have seen through that sign and it is a perfect lorry height too. Any glance was a rapid one as he will have also needed to check his mirrors to ensure his trailer is well positioned on his roadway too, and in a good line for the best execution of the ra. He never saw you until the very last moment and by that time he had probably already engaged the gear and pulling the lorry forward believing it to be clear. To him you will have appeared 'out of nowhere'.
I agree too that you will have had only glances of other traffic the trees potentially hiding other threats.
Ah well, with the sun behind him, another problem, he may also have been facing was getting sun spots from his side mirrors, and the rear of the sign, none of which will have helped him see you! Plus his eyes will have needed time to focus 'though' his sunlight reflections too possibly. he should obviously have slowed more, and been absolutely sure, but perhaps he too thought that he could see all that he needed to. Whether you were slower or faster than normal, may prove that it might be wiser to ensure all others entering the roundabout are doing what you think they are and are not 'suffering' other driving / riding issues that are not at first very obvious. Needs more time to consider this possibly more complicated ra than it appears perhaps - are there many accidents from vehicles at this ra do you know?
Yes we all, always try to make good risk judgements of course, but sometimes we all make mistakes. I think concentrating on how you make yourself / oneself safer has to be the key to learning and developing riding / driving skills and abilities.
yes you did, you noticed him as a threat at the last possible moment leaving you just enough time to prevent an accident, great, but we can all learn from your mistake and remember that being better prepared and thinking about what can happen does this. Looking out now for big signs to other road users may help you never to get into another near miss of this kind ever again, hopefully we will all here learn to look for this too now. I know a local-ism ra to me where a much smaller sign hides the view from a car height precisely and it is a many many nr miss ra for many drivers. Tips are to go out more cautiously and then only 'proceed' when you have 100% good clear ra visibility. Obvious but helpful.
I think if I were cycling on that ra I would be easing up until I was clear of that specific ra road entry and then be more careful with the others too. have you ever driven this ra - what sight lines do you get are they all clear or blocked/ part blocked?
That is when we have concluded the risk management and judgement, and approach the 'experience and confidence' understanding of road abilities. There is of course as I am sure you are well aware the dangers to 'movement assumption', which is often when we are 'shocked' as someone didn't behave as we expected. I think that as you started to realise (to your horror) that he was not going to stop, it took that crucial (but happy not fatal) moment (prob 1 sec), for you to apply your brakes which prevented the accident and in that time he has gone from the potentially 'perception of slowing' / gear change etc, to him proceeding. A driver too that has failed to recognise a road blinded by road furnishings will take time to check again, and it is possible that he never even realised his lack of blindness.
Now that is interesting, if you are 'never 100%' we might proceed much more cautiously do we not ? I know that if I am unsure I go slow or v slow ... and as you think you were going more slowly perhaps there was part of you that was less happy about proceeding than you were 'listening to'?
Well we have to be careful not to exchange confidence for pride of course. I think you are being honourable in admitting failures, as well some success and I think that fair and correct. I just always know that when I mess up I have a host of new things to learn, as I never want to fall foul of any type of mistake more than once, and preferably never, but that is not human ! I think there are some very interesting lessons coming out of this and one's that we can all take with us when encountering every ra.
To just touch on this briefly, ready to stop will see a great slow prior to the next action. From your vid it is not shown, thinking is only part of the ready to stop, the prep to go will show a smoother transition (what you seem to show) but can have less real thinking time. There is not much in this within this specific topic, but we can take it to another thread it is a fascinating area of preparation. Since most women have accidents at junctions it makes many wonder if women should practice this more often!
Humm it is not legal nor proper 'advice', it is what someone thought when consulted, and it has not been made active nor used by any Government, so it really is not anyone's 'advice' at all. The document is 'shelved' if anything by common description it is in fact defunct. Whilst you are of course at liberty to follow said thoughts it would be incorrect to ever imply that they were authoritative, or legal etc.
Ah OK another thread topic then. To be brief - half way through, the driver tooted you because he failed to realise your overtaking path of the next cyclist, and he saw that in the empty road you had ample time to pull in to the verge (or to the cycle lane), and allow him to overtake comfortably in his greatest space too (it was a good time for him too), and you can still pull back out. You are going at some pace too.
I sympathise with the non-sense of many cycle lane positions, and I fear they add to the segregation of road users than help to make us all, not only less tolerant of each other, but also less considerate and helpful.
In many cases your position was wear you felt safe, but at times I did feel that you could have been further in, without loosing out by doing so. The cycle lane crossing the ra entrance like that is highly questionable. Parked cars can be assessed as you approach, I tend to work 3-4 in advance of my position and any threat I slow and move out for, when there is space (will check first - yes agreed you checked many times too). When a car has no one in the front seat (allowing for momentary bent over people), there is no reason why you cannot pass a bit more closely).
The experience, confidence, knowledge and ability helps provide this better management decisions.
I think that all road incidents we can learn from. Even if I had not noticed the huge sign board, that I am now convinced will have effected the driver's ability to see you, that alone tells us that we must allow for these visual problems that others may experience. I can easily imagine how hard you will find rising if you honestly think that there was nothing more you could have done and sadly worse there is little to learn. There is always a reason why we fail to 'observe properly' what we 'see' or fail to look properly or fully in the first place. it might be because we were not really concentrating on the task at hand but in fact having idle thoughts about other things - distraction.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Let me ask you how you might handle this real life situation:
Standard 2 lane road. Two Bollard islands are in road ahead, one about 100m away from each other.
Cyclist is approaching the islands, but turns to see a large Fire engine steadily approaching from behind.
If they carry on cycling, there will not be enough room for the Fire engine to pass and they will meet at the first island. What do you do ?~
Note there is a good empty pavement to the left with no sign of any peds, no one crossing the road either.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Good question, thankfully kept to a nice, short, readable post (well done).

The answer depends on information that is missing from your question - is the fire engine responding to a call (ie are the blues and twos on)?

If yes, I would stop at the kerbside, and wait for the fire engine to pass. I assume even RobinXe would do this in his car (whilst fuming that another road user has caused his speed and direction to change).
If no, then I will continue to cycle along the road, and take a position through the pinch point that ensures that the fire engine will not try to get through it at the same time as me. Same goes for the second island in your scenario.

I'm afraid I don't understand what the pavement has to do with the question. Pavements are for pedestrians and car-parking, aren't they?

I expect fire engine drivers to be well-trained and to act professionally, and in my experience they do. The unpredictable ones are in the cars - most are fine, but you can't tell which are going to be stupid.

If I have time to get off the bike, a curtsey is often appreciated.

I'm sure you know what they say about "to assume"!

In this situation, were the bike and fire appliance to reach the island simultaneously then it is highly probable that on a motorcycle or in a car we'd be past it before the FA caught up, therefore stopping could well be the worst thing to do. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen otherwise seemingly competent road users turn into imbeciles with approaching B&2s and rush to stop (oxymoron?) thus actually snarling up the traffic flow and hindering the passage of the emergency services. I know an ambulance driver who gets very frustrated with the frequency with which this occurs. What is certain is that any allowances I needed to make for the FA's progress would be at my own inconvenience, I wouldn't impose myself on other road users to do so.

As for me "fuming", that really highlights your continued problems with reading what has been written and understanding it, in preference to spouting your anti-non-bicycle-road-user vitriol. If you looked even a few posts back you'd notice me specifically saying that I do not resent making allowances for others on the road, so your attempt to score points with a cheap jibe has only served to make you look even more of a fool. Well done, I'm sure much back-slapping is taking place with your "Internet cyclist" buddies (who cycle a combined total of tens of thousands of miles per year from behind their keyboards no doubt)!

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

I would do exactly the same and, before reading this thread, I would have thought that all experienced cyclists would behave that way. It would be interesting to hear from Claire, Steve, Robin at al what they would do themselves, or what they would expect a cyclist to do. But I suspect that they will beg the question.

_________________
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

For the record, as a London cyclist of 20 years, covering 100+ miles a week it's what I'd do whether it's a fire engine or not..

You'd obstruct a fire engine on an emergency call rather than lose a few seconds and a bit of momentum yourself?

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

You need only look at the post above yours, some 1h 21m before your own to see my input! Good looking-out!

Are we still pedantically correcting spelling? et al

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

I despair, no really, I do. The sooner we have psychometric testing included in the driving test, the better.