Cycle Police - interesting chat

Drysuitdiver

Keyser__Soze wrote:

mar_k wrote:

Ah yes I know the ones.
As a lorry driver I have sometimes stopped just touching them as the lights can catch you out.

I do try to stop behind the line but some times its just not possible.

As a driver you are allowed to stop in them but only if the lights are changing to red and you can't otherwise stop before the ASL. This is one of the issues around enforcing them - can't use cameras as drivers can just claim they were approaching/in the box when the lights changed.

how do red light cameras work then ?? its not that they don't want to its just that councils/whoever is responsible can't be ar5ed to. you would surprised how little of a software adjustment needs to be done

Drysuitdiver

meanredspider wrote:

prj45 wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

mar_k wrote:

Can some one please tell me what an ASL is?

Advanced stop line

The area reserved for bikes at traffic lights

No it's not.

Vehicles (including cycles) are not allowed to move over the first white line when the light is red, if they do they commit an offence (yes, that includes you on your bike) *

If a vehicle crosses the first white line, and then the light goes red it must stop at the second white line.

* cyclist may circumvent this by using the filter lane for cyclists to pass the first white line without crossing it.

Note cars can legally occupy the area.

And you think the Police would prosecute a cyclist crossing the first white line rather than using the filter lane? I think not. And its intent is for it to be reserved for cyclists - that's correct. As with many traffic laws, the subtleties are often complex. I wasn't trying to quote the Highway Code nor any Road Traffic Act.

if i remember to take the pic of it i will show you an ASL that is impossible to use legally on a cycle when the lights are red. cracking work by the ODA

keyser__soze

Drysuitdiver wrote:

how do red light cameras work then ?? its not that they don't want to its just that councils/whoever is responsible can't be ar5ed to. you would surprised how little of a software adjustment needs to be done

If you're driving at walking pace in slow traffic it's easy to get caught in an ASL when the light turns red. You'd need video or multiple photos to prove that a driver hasn't entered the ASL when the lights were green and stopped in it as the lights turned red. Just being in the ASL on a red isn't enough.

How would you design the software to capture ASL breakers with just one static image that covers the law as it stands today?

W1

Keyser__Soze wrote:

Drysuitdiver wrote:

how do red light cameras work then ?? its not that they don't want to its just that councils/whoever is responsible can't be ar5ed to. you would surprised how little of a software adjustment needs to be done

If you're driving at walking pace in slow traffic it's easy to get caught in an ASL when the light turns red. You'd need video or multiple photos to prove that a driver hasn't entered the ASL when the lights were green and stopped in it as the lights turned red. Just being in the ASL on a red isn't enough.

How would you design the software to capture ASL breakers with just one static image that covers the law as it stands today?

Pretty sure red light cameras take two pics.

asprilla

Keyser__Soze wrote:

Drysuitdiver wrote:

how do red light cameras work then ?? its not that they don't want to its just that councils/whoever is responsible can't be ar5ed to. you would surprised how little of a software adjustment needs to be done

If you're driving at walking pace in slow traffic it's easy to get caught in an ASL when the light turns red. You'd need video or multiple photos to prove that a driver hasn't entered the ASL when the lights were green and stopped in it as the lights turned red. Just being in the ASL on a red isn't enough.

How would you design the software to capture ASL breakers with just one static image that covers the law as it stands today?

You use looping video with a 20s memory. If the detector is triggered (someone crosses the line when the light is red then the full 20s, which shows them approaching the ASL is tagged with appropriate metadata and uploaded.

I also don't buy lorry and bus drivers 'sometimes you can't stop' argument. You very rarely see lorries and buses six foot over the line where there is on ASL so why are they so frequently over the first line when there is? Is it because they don't actually see the first as a stop line and are only ever concentrating on the second line?

Of course the problem there is the quality of the camera.

keyser__soze

Yeah, you're right, my bad. I'm thinking about how an ASL camera could work based off just software changes to existing red light cameras. I'd imagine you'd have to have an induction loop in the ASL/before the ASL that determines whether a vehicle was travelling below a certain speed within a certain time after the light went red and was therefore negligent in not stopping before the ASL when perfectly able to. Red light cameras are designed to capture those who've crossed the red light hence the loop may only be configured to capture those who have crossed. Perhaps it could indeed be done with a software change, I'm not sufficiently (remotely?) knowledgeable on induction loops or red light cameras to tell.

One of my main bugbears (that I've discussed before) is that it was proposed that councils could issue FPNs for ASL infringements - hence it becoming an financial incentive for them to pursue those abusing them, just like they currently cover bus lane infringements - but the London Cycling Campaign argued against this, saying it should remain solely the responsibility of the police. The police don't care, they've 'got more important things to do', ergo ASLs remain (almost) totally unenforced. Drivers invariably keep out of bus lanes however, because they know there's a damned good chance of getting an FPN from the council for driving in one.

W1

Keyser__Soze wrote:

Yeah, you're right, my bad. I'm thinking about how an ASL camera could work based off just software changes to existing red light cameras. I'd imagine you'd have to have an induction loop in the ASL/before the ASL that determines whether a vehicle was travelling below a certain speed within a certain time after the light went red and was therefore negligent in not stopping before the ASL when perfectly able to. Red light cameras are designed to capture those who've crossed the red light hence the loop may only be configured to capture those who have crossed. Perhaps it could indeed be done with a software change, I'm not sufficiently (remotely?) knowledgeable on induction loops or red light cameras to tell.

One of my main bugbears (that I've discussed before) is that it was proposed that councils could issue FPNs for ASL infringements - hence it becoming an financial incentive for them to pursue those abusing them, just like they currently cover bus lane infringements - but the London Cycling Campaign argued against this, saying it should remain solely the responsibility of the police. The police don't care, they've 'got more important things to do', ergo ASLs remain (almost) totally unenforced. Drivers invariably keep out of bus lanes however, because they know there's a damned good chance of getting an FPN from the council for driving in one.

I know nothing about red light cameras either, but surely to enforce an ASL, all you do is format the camera (or the lines on the road) so that the first stop line is "the" stop line, and anyone crossing it on red gets a ticket as they would have done previously had they crossed the original stop line.

I find the LCC's attitude bizarre, but I do think the penalty should be £30 and no points (at least to start with).

rjsterry

I guess the LCC is worried about ASL enforcement becoming the new parking enforcement, plus there aren't cameras at every set of lights - a council isn't going to employ 'traffic light wardens'. Is there a legal difference between a police-issued FPN and a council issued bus lane FPN?

W1

rjsterry wrote:

I guess the LCC is worried about ASL enforcement becoming the new parking enforcement, plus there aren't cameras at every set of lights - a council isn't going to employ 'traffic light wardens'. Is there a legal difference between a police-issued FPN and a council issued bus lane FPN?

There aren't cameras on every bus lane either, but you rarely find people driving in them. £120 a pop focuses the mind I suppose.

Drysuitdiver

Keyser__Soze wrote:

Yeah, you're right, my bad. I'm thinking about how an ASL camera could work based off just software changes to existing red light cameras. I'd imagine you'd have to have an induction loop in the ASL/before the ASL that determines whether a vehicle was travelling below a certain speed within a certain time after the light went red and was therefore negligent in not stopping before the ASL when perfectly able to. Red light cameras are designed to capture those who've crossed the red light hence the loop may only be configured to capture those who have crossed. Perhaps it could indeed be done with a software change, I'm not sufficiently (remotely?) knowledgeable on induction loops or red light cameras to tell.

One of my main bugbears (that I've discussed before) is that it was proposed that councils could issue FPNs for ASL infringements - hence it becoming an financial incentive for them to pursue those abusing them, just like they currently cover bus lane infringements - but the London Cycling Campaign argued against this, saying it should remain solely the responsibility of the police. The police don't care, they've 'got more important things to do', ergo ASLs remain (almost) totally unenforced. Drivers invariably keep out of bus lanes however, because they know there's a damned good chance of getting an FPN from the council for driving in one.

is that a feeble attempt at sarcasm ? duno hard to tell from the written word aplogies(sic) if not menat to be
nearly all traffic signals have an inductive loop at increasing intervals back from them. the redlight cameras also connect back into the signal control box and are controlled by the system. the 2 bits of hardware already talk to each other . focusing on major cities the systems all link back to central controlllers which monitor traffic flows in the areas , hence the horrible phrase we all hate to hear " lights are on local control" when the link fails, and could be programmed in. I don't write software i just install and use it on control systems.

roger_merriman

W1 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

I guess the LCC is worried about ASL enforcement becoming the new parking enforcement, plus there aren't cameras at every set of lights - a council isn't going to employ 'traffic light wardens'. Is there a legal difference between a police-issued FPN and a council issued bus lane FPN?

There aren't cameras on every bus lane either, but you rarely find people driving in them. £120 a pop focuses the mind I suppose.

to the point, you get plenty that traffic avoids even though for most of the day they are allowed in.

Drysuitdiver

roger merriman wrote:

W1 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

I guess the LCC is worried about ASL enforcement becoming the new parking enforcement, plus there aren't cameras at every set of lights - a council isn't going to employ 'traffic light wardens'. Is there a legal difference between a police-issued FPN and a council issued bus lane FPN?

There aren't cameras on every bus lane either, but you rarely find people driving in them. £120 a pop focuses the mind I suppose.

to the point, you get plenty that traffic avoids even though for most of the day they are allowed in.

because for the main part , the operators monitoring the cameras don't know when the l;anes are in force and its too much aggro to appeal the ticket as most peole don't remember the operating hours .

I had a ticket for using a bus lane on cassland road hackney nmany years ago, i did appeal as the lane didn't have any operating hours stated as the blue plate was missing, well hadn't been installed as the lane was not at that point in time an operational lane. Hackney highways dept confirmed this in a letter to me which i sent to the department who issued me the ticket.

keyser__soze

Drysuitdiver wrote:

Keyser__Soze wrote:

Yeah, you're right, my bad.

is that a feeble attempt at sarcasm ? duno hard to tell from the written word aplogies(sic) if not menat to be
nearly all traffic signals have an inductive loop at increasing intervals back from them. the redlight cameras also connect back into the signal control box and are controlled by the system.

No sarcasm intended. I was admitting I'd made a mistake with the single camera shot thing. However I'm still not convinced that the currently-installed cameras are located/aimed correctly to capture ASL line infringements rather than the main stop line. If so and it could be done easily then brilliant, but I agree that the operators really cba doing it.

roger_merriman

Drysuitdiver wrote:

roger merriman wrote:

W1 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

I guess the LCC is worried about ASL enforcement becoming the new parking enforcement, plus there aren't cameras at every set of lights - a council isn't going to employ 'traffic light wardens'. Is there a legal difference between a police-issued FPN and a council issued bus lane FPN?

There aren't cameras on every bus lane either, but you rarely find people driving in them. £120 a pop focuses the mind I suppose.

to the point, you get plenty that traffic avoids even though for most of the day they are allowed in.

because for the main part , the operators monitoring the cameras don't know when the l;anes are in force and its too much aggro to appeal the ticket as most peole don't remember the operating hours .

I had a ticket for using a bus lane on cassland road hackney nmany years ago, i did appeal as the lane didn't have any operating hours stated as the blue plate was missing, well hadn't been installed as the lane was not at that point in time an operational lane. Hackney highways dept confirmed this in a letter to me which i sent to the department who issued me the ticket.

never had a ticket thus far, and I'm always using bus lanes legaly. helps that the bus lanes are fairly long with easy times.

mar_k

Asprilla wrote:

I also don't buy lorry and bus drivers 'sometimes you can't stop' argument. You very rarely see lorries and buses six foot over the line where there is on ASL so why are they so frequently over the first line when there is? Is it because they don't actually see the first as a stop line and are only ever concentrating on the second line?

Can I ask if you actualy drive a vehicle?
Well if you do I will say that a bus or lorry is slightly harder to stop than a car, infact i would go as far to say hugely harder.
The thing with the ASL is it moves the stop line about 8ft further away from the traffic lights.
So lets say I am approaching the lights in my lorry which weighs 40ton when loaded and the lights now turn amber which means stop. Effectively the lights combined with the ASL has given me a shorter stopping distance since the stop line behind the ASL is 8ft away from lights.
That 8ft may not seem alot but it is huge when trying to safely slow a heavy vehicle without performing an emergency stop. There for it is some times not possible to avoid stopping in the ASL and by stopping in the ASL still means I am able to stop before the lights.
I have tried my best to explain this in a way the shows what I mean but I fear it may not come across as clear as I would like.
I would be more than happy for anyone doubting the above to take a ride in my lorry for a few hours when I am in town so your able to see exactly what I mean

SmellTheGlove

Until today I had no idea that crossing that white line on my bike into the ASL under red was an offence - not a clue.
Thanks. I always knew the ASL was a crock, for multiple reasons, but this and the idea that the left hand feeder lane is a way to "circumvent it" is the confirmation.
I shall continue to ignore ASLs, but in a much better-informed manner.

Initialised

They use cameras on some Yellow Box Junctions and Traffic lights. Can't they apply the same tech to ASL invaders?

kelsen

mar_k wrote:

Asprilla wrote:

I also don't buy lorry and bus drivers 'sometimes you can't stop' argument. You very rarely see lorries and buses six foot over the line where there is on ASL so why are they so frequently over the first line when there is? Is it because they don't actually see the first as a stop line and are only ever concentrating on the second line?

Can I ask if you actualy drive a vehicle?
Well if you do I will say that a bus or lorry is slightly harder to stop than a car, infact i would go as far to say hugely harder.
The thing with the ASL is it moves the stop line about 8ft further away from the traffic lights.
So lets say I am approaching the lights in my lorry which weighs 40ton when loaded and the lights now turn amber which means stop. Effectively the lights combined with the ASL has given me a shorter stopping distance since the stop line behind the ASL is 8ft away from lights.
That 8ft may not seem alot but it is huge when trying to safely slow a heavy vehicle without performing an emergency stop. There for it is some times not possible to avoid stopping in the ASL and by stopping in the ASL still means I am able to stop before the lights.
I have tried my best to explain this in a way the shows what I mean but I fear it may not come across as clear as I would like.
I would be more than happy for anyone doubting the above to take a ride in my lorry for a few hours when I am in town so your able to see exactly what I mean

O...kay...so would you not start anticipating 8ft earlier when you know you're approaching traffic lights with an ASL?

rjsterry

I think the point that with an ASL, the motor vehicle stop line is 8-10ft in front of the lights as opposed to in line with them is significant. That said, I have lost count of the number of times I have seen vehicles of all sizes make no real attempt to stop at the right line and just keep slowly rolling forward, sometimes a few feet past the forward line too. General traffic light enforcement in London, particularly the 'red=just three more' attitude, is laughably lax, and RLJing and ASL infringement are consistent with this

sketchley

All you need to do is add a rule that says you cannot enter an asl unless your exit is clear, like a box junction. Then it should be impossible to get stuck in it between green and red so anyone in it other that a push bike is committing an offence. Then you could simple use CCTV cameras like they use on some box junctions.

Cycloslalomeur

mar_k wrote:

Asprilla wrote:

I also don't buy lorry and bus drivers 'sometimes you can't stop' argument. You very rarely see lorries and buses six foot over the line where there is on ASL so why are they so frequently over the first line when there is? Is it because they don't actually see the first as a stop line and are only ever concentrating on the second line?

Can I ask if you actualy drive a vehicle?
Well if you do I will say that a bus or lorry is slightly harder to stop than a car, infact i would go as far to say hugely harder.
The thing with the ASL is it moves the stop line about 8ft further away from the traffic lights.
So lets say I am approaching the lights in my lorry which weighs 40ton when loaded and the lights now turn amber which means stop. Effectively the lights combined with the ASL has given me a shorter stopping distance since the stop line behind the ASL is 8ft away from lights.
That 8ft may not seem alot but it is huge when trying to safely slow a heavy vehicle without performing an emergency stop. There for it is some times not possible to avoid stopping in the ASL and by stopping in the ASL still means I am able to stop before the lights.
I have tried my best to explain this in a way the shows what I mean but I fear it may not come across as clear as I would like.
I would be more than happy for anyone doubting the above to take a ride in my lorry for a few hours when I am in town so your able to see exactly what I mean

Running the risk of sounding like an arrogant prat who's never driven an HGV, I must say that the above suggests that you've either ignored the advanced stop line completely or travelled too quickly if you struggle to bring the vehicle to a safe halt at traffic signals. Which part of "stop line" in advanced stop line is confusing?

Paul E

mar_k wrote:

Can I ask if you actualy drive a vehicle?
Well if you do I will say that a bus or lorry is slightly harder to stop than a car, infact i would go as far to say hugely harder.
The thing with the ASL is it moves the stop line about 8ft further away from the traffic lights.
So lets say I am approaching the lights in my lorry which weighs 40ton when loaded and the lights now turn amber which means stop. Effectively the lights combined with the ASL has given me a shorter stopping distance since the stop line behind the ASL is 8ft away from lights.
That 8ft may not seem alot but it is huge when trying to safely slow a heavy vehicle without performing an emergency stop. There for it is some times not possible to avoid stopping in the ASL and by stopping in the ASL still means I am able to stop before the lights.
I have tried my best to explain this in a way the shows what I mean but I fear it may not come across as clear as I would like.
I would be more than happy for anyone doubting the above to take a ride in my lorry for a few hours when I am in town so your able to see exactly what I mean

You should be anticipating for the stop line being 8ft further forward not for it 8ft further back, then you would have no problem being able to stop, if you can't stop before the stop line wherever it is, then you are going to fast for the road and the conditions. (yes I do drive too)

The bold bit is where you technically ran a red light.

beverick

mar_k wrote:

Asprilla wrote:

I also don't buy lorry and bus drivers 'sometimes you can't stop' argument. You very rarely see lorries and buses six foot over the line where there is on ASL so why are they so frequently over the first line when there is? Is it because they don't actually see the first as a stop line and are only ever concentrating on the second line?

Can I ask if you actualy drive a vehicle?
Well if you do I will say that a bus or lorry is slightly harder to stop than a car, infact i would go as far to say hugely harder.
The thing with the ASL is it moves the stop line about 8ft further away from the traffic lights.
So lets say I am approaching the lights in my lorry which weighs 40ton when loaded and the lights now turn amber which means stop. Effectively the lights combined with the ASL has given me a shorter stopping distance since the stop line behind the ASL is 8ft away from lights.
That 8ft may not seem alot but it is huge when trying to safely slow a heavy vehicle without performing an emergency stop. There for it is some times not possible to avoid stopping in the ASL and by stopping in the ASL still means I am able to stop before the lights.
I have tried my best to explain this in a way the shows what I mean but I fear it may not come across as clear as I would like.
I would be more than happy for anyone doubting the above to take a ride in my lorry for a few hours when I am in town so your able to see exactly what I mean

Good grief.

So basically, what you're saying, is that you can't stop your vehicle before you reach a fixed point on the road.

Were you driving this bus by any chance?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16462396


Bob

mar_k

Please bear with me I am trying to word this. I am trying to explain the best way I can.
The fact that the stop line has moved back but the traffic lights have not is the problem,
Stop lines at normal sets of lights are just behind the lights usualy which is fine as thats the way they were designed to be originaly. The lights change to amber and your able to either Stop at the line which would be just behind the lights or if your too close you carry on through the junction before they turn to red.
With the ASL the stop line being 8ft or so behind the lights you do not have that option. If I approach the ASL and the lights go to amber I have to make a choice, can I stop behind the ASL,? lets say no on this occasion. Can I safely make it through the lights? No as they would most likely be on RED as I pass over the 2nd line since that extra 8ft has been added so my only option is to stop in the ASL behind the lights as intended by the orignal design.

Im not being pig headed. I do anticipate the lights changing, I just think they are a poor design.

Beverick your comment has annoyed me a little, I can stop the lorry at a fixed point, however it depends how close I am to that fixed point before I am told to stop at it.
Can none of you see that?

Since a fair few cyclists do not stop at Red Lights I find it incredible that you are trying to pick a fight with some one who does stop at Red Lights, although some times its not possible to stop at the 1st line.

It all depends how far away from the 1st line at the point the lights change.

That extra bit of the ASL can mean the diffrence between me going through on amber or on red and since amber means stop, thats exactly what I try to do, even if it means me stopping in the ASL. Surely thats the better option to me going through on Red?

Applespider

I'm also guessing that unless you drive a route regularly, it's not that easy to tell if a junction has an ASL or not when you are 40ft back planning a safe stopping distance.

Anyhow... this morning, there was an idiot in a white hire van at Stockwell who started to rev his engine and creep forward from almost the moment he'd come to a complete stop just behind the ASL. By the time the lights changed (another sequence for the second primary road, a long time for pedestrians to cross and then a gap while other pedestrians decide whether to play chicken with the red man), he was coming out the front of the ASL. Thankfully, I was in the lane next to him rather than in front of him.

mar_k

I would like to add that I am in no way against ASL's, They are a great idea in theory.
But I would like to see them better planned. Maybe move the lights and Red light camera sensors back inline with 1st stopline, That way if I was unable to stop at the 1st line I would be able to safely pass the junction in order to keep the ASL clear without the risk of running a Red.

jds_1981

Applespider wrote:

By the time the lights changed (another sequence for the second primary road, a long time for pedestrians to cross and then a gap while other pedestrians decide whether to play chicken with the red man), he was coming out the front of the ASL. Thankfully, I was in the lane next to him rather than in front of him.

Heh, I seem to have at least one video that will match almost any situation http://vimeo.com/19307797

kelsen

mar_k wrote:

Please bear with me I am trying to word this. I am trying to explain the best way I can.
The fact that the stop line has moved back but the traffic lights have not is the problem,
Stop lines at normal sets of lights are just behind the lights usualy which is fine as thats the way they were designed to be originaly. The lights change to amber and your able to either Stop at the line which would be just behind the lights or if your too close you carry on through the junction before they turn to red.
With the ASL the stop line being 8ft or so behind the lights you do not have that option. If I approach the ASL and the lights go to amber I have to make a choice, can I stop behind the ASL,? lets say no on this occasion. Can I safely make it through the lights? No as they would most likely be on RED as I pass over the 2nd line since that extra 8ft has been added so my only option is to stop in the ASL behind the lights as intended by the orignal design.

Im not being pig headed. I do anticipate the lights changing, I just think they are a poor design.

Beverick your comment has annoyed me a little, I can stop the lorry at a fixed point, however it depends how close I am to that fixed point before I am told to stop at it.
Can none of you see that?

Since a fair few cyclists do not stop at Red Lights I find it incredible that you are trying to pick a fight with some one who does stop at Red Lights, although some times its not possible to stop at the 1st line.

It all depends how far away from the 1st line at the point the lights change.

That extra bit of the ASL can mean the diffrence between me going through on amber or on red and since amber means stop, thats exactly what I try to do, even if it means me stopping in the ASL. Surely thats the better option to me going through on Red?

It makes a little bit more sense to me now. Basically, at a junction without a ASL, you could carry on through on amber as the vehicle would already be past the stop line. But with a ASL, although you might pass the first stop line when it changes to amber, you would be running a red by the time you pass the second stop line so elect to stop instead even though you're in the ASL area.

I don't think anyone is trying to pick a fight, just not seeing it (literally) from your point of view. Appreciate driving an HGV is not easy and there are good lorry drivers out there as well.

Mr Sworld

I've not got a HGV licence but drive 7.5T trucks every now and again. They don't stop easily (due to the fact they weigh 7.5T when laden), have air brakes (which aren't quite as responsive as disk brakes) and are beasts to drive.

I could compare the difference between a car and a truck like this:

My MTB has hydraulic disc brakes, it stops.

My singlespeed has pads, it also stops but not as well as the MTB.

rml380z

Mr Sworld wrote:

I've not got a HGV licence but drive 7.5T trucks every now and again. They don't stop easily (due to the fact they weigh 7.5T when laden), have air brakes (which aren't quite as responsive as disk brakes) and are beasts to drive.

I could compare the difference between a car and a truck like this:

My MTB has hydraulic disc brakes, it stops.

My singlespeed has pads, it also stops but not as well as the MTB.

Doesn't that just mean you modify your driving depending on the vehicle you're using so that you still drive safely and obey all the rules of the road?