BBC News picks up on "Lorries turning left across cycli

TommyEss

Story here

I know we've discussed ad-nauseum the issues here - but hopefully with this getting into a more mainstream media source, rather than our humble specialist website, people, both cyclists and drivers, will start to get the message and ride/drive a bit more sensibly around junctions.

One can dream, yeah?!

_Brun_

She should really be wearing a helmet.

kurako

Interesting graphic. Why do people think it is safer to go in front in the first place? If cyclist and lorry are both going in the same direction it'll probably need to pass at some point anyway.

I would think behind the lorry and possibly slighty to the right is the safest place.

Also, the conclusion in the TFL report that "women cyclists are far more likely to be killed by lorries because, unlike men, they tend to obey red lights and wait at junctions in the driver's blind spot." strikes me as utter f*cking sh*te :!:

_Brun_

Kurako wrote:

Interesting graphic. Why do people think it is safer to go in front in the first place?

Generally because their common sense is overwhelmed by their impatience.

deptfordmarmoset

''Marian Louise Noonan, 32, from south London, is a confessed kerb-hugger, and that leaves her feeling quite vulnerable on the roads, unlike her husband.

"He cycles much more aggressively and is aware of all the traffic around him. He cycles as if someone is going to hit him and makes sure he is in a safe position," she says. ''

How comes she thinks her husband is riding ''aggressively?'' He seems to be doing all the right things - and he's really only being assertive as part of a defensive strategy.

TommyEss

Yeah, a lot of people will dismiss that as semantics, but there's a massive difference between riding assertively and giving drivers a clear idea of your intentions (the looks over your shoulder, good early hand signals, riding in the correct part of the lane for the move you're going to make) and riding aggresively...

Riding aggresively?

Snarling at everything and everyone, jumping every red light at warp speed, flipping birds left right and centre... Don't think you'd last too long doing all that malarkey!

ince

I'm going to get a long hair wig attachment for my lid so cars will give me more space. :shock:

It's a real case of ride to be seen and don't put your self in blind spots. It's not being aggressive but rather assertive.

biondino

I've been thinking about this and while many of the generalisations may be true (I personally believe some are), the only firm reason that's empirically provable that I can think of is that women are slower than men. This means they are slower to react to danger; less confident in their abilities because speed isn't an option as a response to danger; and, most importantly, they will spend longer IN dangerous spots because it takes them longer to get out of them.

Obviously some women are speedy, but on average I'll wager they're 3 or 4 mph slower than men, with an even bigger difference when it comes to acceleration.

TommyEss

I still think the majority comes down to psychology - men find it much easier to be self-centred and bloody-minded - so when you're on the bike it's very easy to put yourself first - you don't worry so much about what the driver will think if you hold them up for 5 seconds, and you're cocky enough to give them some verbal back if they don't like it.

Most ladies have a fair bit more social decorum - are more likely to be thinking about the other people's feelings, more likely to be intimidated, and less likely to stand their ground when they're in the right.

It's why we love them - it's everything we can't fathom out - but it seems to be pretty non-condusive to riding in busy traffic.

All comes back to putting more responsibility onto drivers though - you're in charge of over a tonne of metal - and those cyclists you see, are soft squishy people, with friends and families who love them - think of us more like pedestrians (in terms of vulnerability - no tough metal shell like a car) and drive accordingly.

deptfordmarmoset

I just had a second look at the graphic. Didn't notice it at first, but they do not represent the same road conditions, because the lorry in diagram 2 has mysteriously reversed about 4m back up the road, thereby leaving cyclist 2 plenty of room (space which cyclist 1 would also have had). And I've never seen that happen on the road. If lorries suddenly started moving backwards in lanes of traffic everything would get just that little bit more scary.

_Brun_

That's well spotted. Not knowing whether there is a gap in front of an HGV is even more reason to not go past it.

TommyEss

Good spot - is it to indicate the presence of an ASL?

Still - unless I've seen the lights just change to red, I won't undertake a lorry/bus etc, unless I'm very very confident of the lighting sequence. And even then, I'll most likely hang back.

Oddjob62

I think it's trying to signify that you should only overtake if there's roon in front so you can be seen by the driver. How you're meant to tell that when you're behind a >30ft lorry is anyone's guess.

suzyb

TommyEss wrote:

I still think the majority comes down to psychology - men find it much easier to be self-centred and bloody-minded - so when you're on the bike it's very easy to put yourself first - you don't worry so much about what the driver will think if you hold them up for 5 seconds, and you're cocky enough to give them some verbal back if they don't like it.

Most ladies have a fair bit more social decorum - are more likely to be thinking about the other people's feelings, more likely to be intimidated, and less likely to stand their ground when they're in the right.

That's me to a t.

I don't like cycling too far out on fast roads so any cars coming past don't have to slow down as much. As a result they often don't give me as much room as they perhaps should and I end up cycling over the bumpy section of the road.

I have undertaken a couple of lorries and buses though. However it was at lights where they couldn't turn left and I had time to get in front where they could see me.

kurako

-null- wrote:

I have undertaken a couple of lorries and buses though. However it was at lights where they couldn't turn left and I had time to get in front where they could see me.

Why do you think it's safer to be in front?

Making a large vehicle pass unecessarily is just asking for trouble.

TommyEss

I guess it's just practice - even if it feels strange - you have to push yourself to do it - then you'll find you gain confidence, and it'll all get a bit better.

There should really be some proper courses to teach people how to ride defensively - with the flip being that defensive riding is actually a very positive mind-set. This would be really useful to anyone new to commuting by road, not just ladies.

TommyEss

Kurako wrote:

-null- wrote:

I have undertaken a couple of lorries and buses though. However it was at lights where they couldn't turn left and I had time to get in front where they could see me.

Why do you think it's safer to be in front?

Making a large vehicle pass unecessarily is just asking for trouble.

It does depend on the circumstances - in slow moving traffic, even a pensioner on a 3 speed shopper will be faster than the traffic - so get to the front at lights when safe, and then ride in the centre of the lane - I always ride in the centre when I'm comfortably matching the speed of traffic - as it prevents people from squeezing past - it holds them up by maybe 2 metres - I've never had aggro for that in traffic.

biondino

Kurako wrote:

-null- wrote:

I have undertaken a couple of lorries and buses though. However it was at lights where they couldn't turn left and I had time to get in front where they could see me.

Why do you think it's safer to be in front?

Making a large vehicle pass unecessarily is just asking for trouble.

Because they can't help but see you. Most of these accidents are likely caused by the cyclist being (whether through their own foolishness, or the way traffic has ended up) in the blind spot of the lorry. No lorry driver wants to squash a cyclist, and while there may be marginal dangers involved in a lorry re-overtaking you (minimal since both parties will know where the other is), there are infinite dangers in being in a space where you're invisible.

georgee

I added my bit on the comments about the medias complete non reporting of this and it should not be a magazine piece but a serious top line news piece about what is happening in the world, ignored no doubt, but with hope it sticks in the mind of some web editor.

kurako

TommyEss wrote:

Kurako wrote:

-null- wrote:

I have undertaken a couple of lorries and buses though. However it was at lights where they couldn't turn left and I had time to get in front where they could see me.

Why do you think it's safer to be in front?

Making a large vehicle pass unecessarily is just asking for trouble.

It does depend on the circumstances - in slow moving traffic, even a pensioner on a 3 speed shopper will be faster than the traffic - so get to the front at lights when safe, and then ride in the centre of the lane - I always ride in the centre when I'm comfortably matching the speed of traffic - as it prevents people from squeezing past - it holds them up by maybe 2 metres - I've never had aggro for that in traffic.

Sure you need to take conditions into account but a cyclist who lacks confidence is unlikely to make a good judgement call. The routes I cycle have a lot of bus lanes so there's generally a clear run for buses and taxis even at the busiest times. I've lost count of the times I've seen a bus in front at the lights and someone goes in front of it. If there's a bus stop just after the lights the bus goes past and pulls in and the poor cyclist finds themselves a) stuck behind the bus or b) squeezed between the bus and the kerb.

In any case there's little advantage to be gained from having gone in front in the first place and a lot of extra risk. The same thing can be said when people line up on the inside of a vehicle which wants to turn left. Rather than being behind the vehicle where you are relatively in control you are relying on the driver to overtake safely and not wipe you out.

NOTE: I'm using 'you' in a purely generic sense. Nothing personal.

_Brun_

biondino wrote:

Kurako wrote:

-null- wrote:

I have undertaken a couple of lorries and buses though. However it was at lights where they couldn't turn left and I had time to get in front where they could see me.

Why do you think it's safer to be in front?

Making a large vehicle pass unecessarily is just asking for trouble.

Because they can't help but see you. Most of these accidents are likely caused by the cyclist being (whether through their own foolishness, or the way traffic has ended up) in the blind spot of the lorry. No lorry driver wants to squash a cyclist, and while there may be marginal dangers involved in a lorry re-overtaking you (minimal since both parties will know where the other is), there are infinite dangers in being in a space where you're invisible.

I think the inference was why is it safer to be in front rather than behind.

biondino

Fair enough. I think behind you have the inevitable problem of being sandwiched as vehicles pull away, when to be in primary, when to move out of it etc. I'd rather be in frotn - though I do appreciate I'm keen to accelerate quickly in that situation and perhaps people who aren't/can't might prefer to be behind the lorry.

Wallace1492

Kurako wrote:

-null- wrote:

I have undertaken a couple of lorries and buses though. However it was at lights where they couldn't turn left and I had time to get in front where they could see me.

Why do you think it's safer to be in front?

Making a large vehicle pass unecessarily is just asking for trouble.

I agree. If I am behind a bus or a lorry at lights, even if they cannot turn left, i still sit behind them. They will inevitably be faster than me, and if I did filter past, they would then need to re-take me, causing danger. I only normally take buses at bus stops, obviously if it is safe to do so.

Honestly, let buses and lorries be at lights, you do not always need to be in front, even if there is an ASL, better to be safe.

kurako

Wallace1492 wrote:

Kurako wrote:

-null- wrote:

I have undertaken a couple of lorries and buses though. However it was at lights where they couldn't turn left and I had time to get in front where they could see me.

Why do you think it's safer to be in front?

Making a large vehicle pass unecessarily is just asking for trouble.

I agree. If I am behind a bus or a lorry at lights, even if they cannot turn left, i still sit behind them. They will inevitably be faster than me, and if I did filter past, they would then need to re-take me, causing danger. I only normally take buses at bus stops, obviously if it is safe to do so.

Honestly, let buses and lorries be at lights, you do not always need to be in front, even if there is an ASL, better to be safe.

Exactly. ASLs give the illusion of safety but I think they're over-rated.

prawny

Wallace1492 wrote:

Kurako wrote:

-null- wrote:

I have undertaken a couple of lorries and buses though. However it was at lights where they couldn't turn left and I had time to get in front where they could see me.

Why do you think it's safer to be in front?

Making a large vehicle pass unecessarily is just asking for trouble.

I agree. If I am behind a bus or a lorry at lights, even if they cannot turn left, i still sit behind them. They will inevitably be faster than me, and if I did filter past, they would then need to re-take me, causing danger. I only normally take buses at bus stops, obviously if it is safe to do so.

Honestly, let buses and lorries be at lights, you do not always need to be in front, even if there is an ASL, better to be safe.

Yup this is my feeling.

Today I nearly got wiped out because I was following a car coming up to the back f a traffic jam on a dual carriage way and was about to filter down the middle, when the driver spots the 3 meters of cycle lane thats been put by a junction, notices me and kindly swerves to the right so I can go in the cycle lane, only I don't want to be in the cycle lane :x So I slip past him on the right and then hunt for a gap so I can get back to the middle it was a right pain. Cycle lanes are a menace! :roll:

always_tyred

Kurako wrote:

They will inevitably be faster than me, and if I did filter past, they would then need to re-take me, causing danger.

I disagree with this. It completely depends on the road. In city traffic, cycling is the fastest mode of transport.

prawny

Always Tyred wrote:

Kurako wrote:

They will inevitably be faster than me, and if I did filter past, they would then need to re-take me, causing danger.

I disagree with this. It completely depends on the road. In city traffic, cycling is the fastest mode of transport.

There is that, I'm looking at it from a brum point of view, in london I suspect it's completely different.

TommyEss

prawny wrote:

Yup this is my feeling.

Today I nearly got wiped out because I was following a car coming up to the back f a traffic jam on a dual carriage way and was about to filter down the middle, when the driver spots the 3 meters of cycle lane thats been put by a junction, notices me and kindly swerves to the right so I can go in the cycle lane, only I don't want to be in the cycle lane :x So I slip past him on the right and then hunt for a gap so I can get back to the middle it was a right pain. Cycle lanes are a menace! :roll:

I get similar riding home on London Road in Reading - I work by the roundabout with the A329M, so I'm launched straight into two solid lanes of traffic crawling in towards Cemetery Junction - so I always filter through the centre of the two lanes

At this time of year with the lights flashing into people's wing mirrors, I get a number of drivers moving a little away from the centre on both sides, giving me a bit more room - which I thank them for if I'm not negotiating a tosser!

However, if the traffic's a bit better, I'll be in primary, following cars - and only when the traffic slows up do I head for the centre of the two lanes - only often some "helpful" soul will see me, and move right (to give me a bit more room on the inside) jsut as I'm aiming to head right and filter between the two lanes - so I get blocked off.

I know they mean well - but it's a right PITA sometimes. Then they look out out that I've done it -

You can't win - just keep your wits about you and your hands covering the brakes.

kurako

prawny wrote:

Always Tyred wrote:

Kurako wrote:

They will inevitably be faster than me, and if I did filter past, they would then need to re-take me, causing danger.

I disagree with this. It completely depends on the road. In city traffic, cycling is the fastest mode of transport.

There is that, I'm looking at it from a brum point of view, in london I suspect it's completely different.

Hey! I never wrote that. It was Wallace. I'm fast as!!! :P

I think the point is that under normal driving conditions most cyclists will be slower than vehicular traffic. Really busy traffic is different so, yeah, of course you'll probably be filtering. The point is that the ASL isn't always appropriate in spite of what articles like this try to say.

biondino

Always Tyred wrote:

Kurako wrote:

They will inevitably be faster than me, and if I did filter past, they would then need to re-take me, causing danger.

I disagree with this. It completely depends on the road. In city traffic, cycling is the fastest mode of transport.

+1. Vehicles only overtake me on longish, clearish stretches of road, and most of my commute I'm overtaking them. But ymmv.

Wallace1492

prawny wrote:

Always Tyred wrote:

Kurako wrote:

They will inevitably be faster than me, and if I did filter past, they would then need to re-take me, causing danger.

I disagree with this. It completely depends on the road. In city traffic, cycling is the fastest mode of transport.

There is that, I'm looking at it from a brum point of view, in london I suspect it's completely different.

OK, in context then I suppose. Heavy city traffic like London or centre of Glasgow you may be able to go by and stay ahead, but I was more thinking of on commuter roads further out of town, knowing where -null- lives, it is more than likely the bus or lorry will go by, as it is for me on Maryhill Road, so a judgement call should be made.

Where the traffic and experience dictate that they will go by you, then do not filter past. If they could be turning left, even if not indicating, do not filter past. If you are unsure if you can make it before lights change, do not filter past.