Almost witnessed quite an accident.. again

chbenson

Iv'e seen this happen a couple of times now, but its quite a scary thing to see.

Essentially there is usually bumper to bumper traffic on the a23 to london and back, often at junctions like this there is a lorry or a big vehicle there(green box), either partly in the box junction or just on the edge. someone on the oncoming side is turning right, who would be at fault in a situation like this if the car turning right hit the cyclist,as both cannot see each other until they are very close

With the lorry there there is almost no chance to spot the car until you're at the edge of the box junction, there is more than enough room for a cyclist on the left of the lorry and the cars in front, can not over take on the right because oncoming traffic is too close.

Also, would a cycle lane being present or not make a difference to who may be at fault.



Red ones are cars, green one is a big lorry. Blue one is bike.

Agent57

If there's a gap that a vehicle could turn into, it's sensible for the cyclist to slow down and make sure no one is turning as he crosses the junction. Car drivers will often assume it's OK to go if they're left a gap, especially if flashed by a vehicle in the other lane. As the squishier body, I approach such situations with caution.

dhope

This was how I got knocked off when I started commuting, on Tooley St, outside London Bridge station.
The car would be at fault as the cyclist has right of way. Both have a responsibility to be aware enough to avoid an incident though. In my case, neither of us were quite aware enough, so we had a low speed accident.

I am more aware these days...

BillyMansell

From the information given, why do say only the car turning right would be at fault? Does the cyclist not have a responsibility to ensure it is safe to filter left and to cross the junction before doing so?

chbenson

What is a nuisance about situations like this is that you really have to approach the junction at aound 5 or 6 mph to be able to stop in time esp when raining, and when there are junctions like this every 100m, your journey really does slow down. Additionally cyclists behind get quite annoyed as many don't seem to feel the need to slow at junctions and just continue at 15 mph or more.

What is worst I think is when these aren't box junctions and the car turning right has to squeeze through a gap between two vehicles. The cyclist really doesn't have much of a chance then as both cant see each other

dhope

BillyMansell wrote:

From the information given, why do say only the car turning right would be at fault? Does the cyclist not have a responsibility to ensure it is safe to filter left and to cross the junction before doing so?

Both have a responsibility of course. The fault would lie with the car though as it is crossing another lane of traffic. The cyclist is simply staying in their lane going forward.

Certainly the insurance company of the bloke that hit me felt that way anyway.

BillyMansell

dhope wrote:

Both have a responsibility of course. The fault would lie with the car though as it is crossing another lane of traffic. The cyclist is simply staying in their lane going forward.

It's not as simple as saying it's the motorist's fault just because they are crossing another lane of traffic as that sets a dangerous precedent where some cyclists may perceive they always have the right of way when going forward or using cycle lanes (the belief in a protected road space possibly adding to the perception of right of way). Every situation has to be judged and every hazard perceived on it's own merit.

There's been more than one situation where I've had an accident that wasn't my fault but had I perceived the dangers better I may have avoided the accidents altogether. That's not excusing bad driving but I'd rather not have accidents in the first place and getting hit and injured can't be the best way of finding fault in others or proving our right to be on the road.

dhope

BillyMansell wrote:

dhope wrote:

Both have a responsibility of course. The fault would lie with the car though as it is crossing another lane of traffic. The cyclist is simply staying in their lane going forward.

It's not as simple as saying it's the motorist's fault just because they are crossing another lane of traffic as that sets a dangerous precedent where some cyclists may perceive they always have the right of way when going forward or using cycle lanes (the belief in a protected road space possibly adding to the perception of right of way). Every situation has to be judged and every hazard perceived on it's own merit.

There's been more than one situation where I've had an accident that wasn't my fault but had I perceived the dangers better I may have avoided the accidents altogether. That's not excusing bad driving but I'd rather not have accidents in the first place and getting hit and injured can't be the best way of finding fault in others or proving our right to be on the road.

Which was what I said in my first post. The car in this instance is at fault, legally. I also said that both the driver and I should have been more aware in the incident I had, which was the exact situation in the OP's diagram.

I'm not a huge fan of cycle lanes, I see myself as a part of the traffic rather than a cyclist navigating around traffic. There is no protected space and it's dangerous to assume otherwise.

mouth

Perhaps a case for the cyclist to filter on the right hand side?

The car driver would be at fault but there is no reason for the cyclist to be negligent. Normally a junction like this would have traffic lights. How do they fall into the situation?

bails87

I'd be filtering on the right too.

If I was on the left I would be pulling out past the bus very carefully, if there's a space then you can be expecting someone to turn into it.

rick_chasey

If you know it's a problem area - filter on the right.

BillyMansell

The OP did say there wasn't room to filter on the right.

Another issue with filtering on the left may be that if you do have to stop beside the lorry to allow traffic to cross you could be in the lorry driver's blind spot - not a safe place to find yourself.

Origamist

The third option is to wait behind the HGV until the box junction clears - but very few cyclists would do this if the traffic light phasing was green.

If you're going to go on the left (because of the wider gap) make sure the HGV is not indicating left and move forward gingerly until you can see it's clear on the right of turning traffic. If cyclists are behind you, look back and shout "easy" or "slowing" well before you brake, to alert them.

Often when filtering on the right where available road space can be limited (due to cycle lanes, pedestrian refuges etc) you have to wait for a gap in the oncoming traffic - but if vehicles are intermittently turning right at the box junction a gap will often present itself (check the HGV is not indicating right though). The advantage with this approach is that you have a better sightlines of oncoming and turning traffic.

Whatever side you choose, be very wary when filtering on the approach to box junctions.

Jay dubbleU

I wouldn't be to the left of a lorry on a junction like that - too much risk of it turn left and wiping me out. Don't assume because its not signalling left that it won't turn left

MonkeyMonster

Had similar situation this morning but it was actually all moving and I was the one turning. All the way down a round a cyclist had been in the blind zone behind the car I was waiting to go through. Nothing bad just I had to slow again and he was warier too. But I had no idea he was there.

Guess if you're coming up to a juntion always try to be sure you can see who might turn into it and if you can't slow down or move to make sure you can .

EKE_38BPM

The way I see it, there are four options:
1) Filter past the lorry and across the junction on the left. I wouldn't do this because if the lorry turns left or an oncoming vehicle turns right, it could wipe you out.
2) Filter past the lorry on the right. The OP says there is no space to do this, so this option is out. Even if there was space I would be very careful about doing this as it is not unknown for a vehicle to emerge from the minor road and attempt to turn right. This could wipe you out.
3) Wait behind the lorry and when the lorry begins moving, move with it and overtake (on the right) when it is safe.
4) Get off the bike at the roadside and walk with the bike along the footway, cross the minor road and begin riding in the road when it is safe.

I would say options 1 and 2 are out for safety reasons.
Option 3 is the one I would usually take, but if the lorry is stationary for longer than I was prepared to wait, then switch mode from being a road user to being a pedestrian pushing a bike. Being able to switch modes like this is one of the benefits of cycling and one which many people are reluctant to exercise. I would say that the more experienced you are, the less likely you are to exercise this option, even though it may be the best one in the circumstances.

phy2sll2

A variation on the above (scuse the paint skills!)



Nearly came unstuck in this situation the other day, except I wasn't filtering on the left of anything, just a right turning van blocking the vision of a van coming the other direction. Van pulled out. Bit scary.

EKE_38BPM

phy2sll2 wrote:

A variation on the above (scuse the paint skills!)



Nearly came unstuck in this situation the other day, except I wasn't filtering on the left of anything, just a right turning van blocking the vision of a van coming the other direction. Van pulled out. Bit scary.

As you said, the vans block each others vision down the road so they can't see oncoming traffic. Because of this reason, best practice is for the two vehicles to pass offside to offside, rather than nearside to near side, as you have illustrated.

Origamist

phy2sll2 wrote:

A variation on the above (scuse the paint skills!)



Nearly came unstuck in this situation the other day, except I wasn't filtering on the left of anything, just a right turning van blocking the vision of a van coming the other direction. Van pulled out. Bit scary.

It's tricky, apart from slowing down and peering around the van as best you can (it's easier if you're not too far to the right), there's not much you can do. If the hidden vehicle moves right, you'll hopefully be travelling slowly enough to be able to stop or swerve in time. This is easier said than done if you have a vehicle behind you (a shoulder check might help though). In these situations, you have to spot the visual cues and piece them together in order to identify the potential threat(s).

Another tactic is to use traffic to your right as a shield as you go through the junction - this is problematic as you can be left hooked and, when cars/vans/HGVs/buses hit one another, they can move considerable distances and you might not be afforded the protection you imagine.

@Eke - I imagine the fourth option you suggest is not very appealing to more experienced cyclists as they are more likely to wear road shoes and cleats, making walking less than ideal. It also means you're not as agile as a pedestrian (you're pushing your bike). Finally, most of the people I see who hop/push up the kerb in order to circumevent traffic, often rejoin the road at the most inopportune moment. That said, if people do it politely and safely, no problem.

EKE_38BPM

Origamist wrote:

@Eke - I imagine the fourth option you suggest is not very appealing to more experienced cyclists as they are more likely to wear road shoes and cleats, making walking less than ideal. It also means you're not as agile as a pedestrian (you're pushing your bike). Finally, most of the people I see who hop/push up the kerb in order to circumevent traffic, often rejoin the road at the most inopportune moment. That said, if people do it politely and safely, no problem.

I always ride in either SPDs or carbon fibre soled SPD-SLs. I know the reasons to not want to temporarily become a ped, but if it is the safest and quickest option, why not?
If the extra wear to your cleats as you walk across the road is that much of an issue to you, I hope you ride a brakeless fixie as brakes cause wear to your brake pads AND your rims!!! Alternatively, you could use these.

Sometimes getting off your bike and walking is the most sensible thing to do.

Origamist

EKE_38BPM wrote:

I always ride in either SPDs or carbon fibre soled SPD-SLs. I know the reasons to not want to temporarily become a ped, but if it is the safest and quickest option, why not?
If the extra wear to your cleats as you walk across the road is that much of an issue to you, I hope you ride a brakeless fixie as brakes cause wear to your brake pads AND your rims!!! Alternatively, you could use these.

Sometimes getting off your bike and walking is the most sensible thing to do.

I'm not sure why you think I am worried about cleat wear as I made no mention of it. However, as you've raised the issue, I am happy to put on record that it does not bother me one iota.

Back to the substantive issue - as well as walking in road shoes and cleats, there are inherent dangers in adopting the "getting off your bike" approach as it involves stopping in the road, crossing a side road and rejoining a moving traffic lane. Therefore, it might not be the safest course of action, but as I said earlier, it's an approach that I would consider.

chbenson

The problem I find whilst cycling in rush hour traffic in London is that when these situations arise, there are usually 4 or 5 cyclists at a time approaching these junctions where the driver and cyclist are blind of each other until they are very close.

Additionally stopping to walk is something I do myself, but only on the very rare occasion, esp if I feel it would be unsafe to stay where I am, however it often isn't practical or possible to do so, firstly as there are very often railings/bollards on the pavement preventing you from mounting it, and cyclists behind get extremely agitated when one does so.

Also when you consider there are junctions like these every 50-100m, the journey slows down considerably. I personally try to avoid busy times as much as possible often leaving home around 6.30am to reach by 7.30 and leaving earlier in the afternoon.

One thing that really does not seen safe that cyclists often seem to do is if there is room for the cyclist in front, they will often assume they will also be able to pass especially if they speed up. This happens a lot approaching lights turning red, crossing junctions, or when overtaking buses or filtering through stationary traffic that is soon about to move.

EKE_38BPM

Origamist wrote:

EKE_38BPM wrote:

I always ride in either SPDs or carbon fibre soled SPD-SLs. I know the reasons to not want to temporarily become a ped, but if it is the safest and quickest option, why not?
If the extra wear to your cleats as you walk across the road is that much of an issue to you, I hope you ride a brakeless fixie as brakes cause wear to your brake pads AND your rims!!! Alternatively, you could use these.

Sometimes getting off your bike and walking is the most sensible thing to do.

I'm not sure why you think I am worried about cleat wear as I made no mention of it. However, as you've raised the issue, I am happy to put on record that it does not bother me one iota.

I was deliberately being silly.

Origamist wrote:

Back to the substantive issue - as well as walking in road shoes and cleats, there are inherent dangers in adopting the "getting off your bike" approach as it involves stopping in the road, crossing a side road and rejoining a moving traffic lane. Therefore, it might not be the safest course of action, but as I said earlier, it's an approach that I would consider.

If proper observation and signals are used, stopping at the side of the road shouldn't present a major danger, certainly no more than attempting to negotiate a dangerous junction. Many journeys on a bike start and end at the side of a road, this shouldn't be seen as a reason not to get off of your bike.
Railings are more of an issue to stopping cyclists getting off of their bikes. I think that if I wanted to get off of my bike because of stationary traffic and a dangerous junction, I would turn left into the junction (not as dangerous as going across) and either performing a U turn in the minor road if safe, or getting off of my bike in the side road, crossing it on foot and remounting my bike.
Yes, it would be slower, but also safer.

If the major road had many junctions like this, it would be a bummer. Its not a problem I've ever encountered (feeling so unsafe that I've felt the need to walk past many junctions), but I like to think that I wouldn't be so overconfident that I would be adamant about continuing to ride on a road which I felt unsafe on.
Generally, I wait in the traffic stream and filter on the right when safe, but I know there are few hard and fast rules on what it is safest to do and decisions have to be made at the time in rapidly changing situations.

Origamist

EKE_38BPM wrote:

If proper observation and signals are used, stopping at the side of the road shouldn't present a major danger, certainly no more than attempting to negotiate a dangerous junction. Many journeys on a bike start and end at the side of a road, this shouldn't be seen as a reason not to get off of your bike.

Getting hit from behind behind by a fellow cyclist is something that happens - particularly if you are pulling left to the kerb when faced with a green light at a junction. Shoulder check, indicate and shout "stopping" is my approach.

Yes, journeys start and end at the side of the road, but most people I have seen who use the pavement to avoid traffic lights, large stationary vehicles, queues, junctions etc etc do this hurriedly i.e they ride on the pavement, over the side road, or push their bike whilst running. When your rushing, you're more likely to make a mistake, like Willy Weasel.

A sizeable proportion of cyclist injuries are when they rejoin the traffic lane. I'd hazard this is because many people are still in "cyclist" mode and do not have the mindset of a pedestrian when making like a penguin and pushing their steed.

EKE_38BPM wrote:

Railings are more of an issue to stopping cyclists getting off of their bikes. I think that if I wanted to get off of my bike because of stationary traffic and a dangerous junction, I would turn left into the junction (not as dangerous as going across) and either performing a U turn in the minor road if safe, or getting off of my bike in the side road, crossing it on foot and remounting my bike. Yes, it would be slower, but also safer.

Thankfully, railings are slowly being removed from many boroughs of London.

Turning left into a side road only to U-turn does not sound appealing - firstly, because in the OP's example there is a large vehicle at the front of the queue, obscuring traffic and with the potential to turn left, and secondly, because U-turns are unpredictable.

EKE_38BPM wrote:

If the major road had many junctions like this, it would be a bummer. Its not a problem I've ever encountered (feeling so unsafe that I've felt the need to walk past many junctions), but I like to think that I wouldn't be so overconfident that I would be adamant about continuing to ride on a road which I felt unsafe on.
Generally, I wait in the traffic stream and filter on the right when safe, but I know there are few hard and fast rules on what it is safest to do and decisions have to be made at the time in rapidly changing situations.

I think the OP would do well to reconsider his/her route, if this is a constant problem. When I lived a few hundred metres from the A23, I would very rarely use it, preferring different roads.

Where we agree, is that I would not rule out dismounting and using the pavement. That said, it's an approach that I rarely adopt as I'm not that confident it's an appropriate method to negotiate stopped traffic at London's many box juncitons.

If I kept on having difficulties, I would consider a) avoiding the junction(s), b) cycle training and c) highlighting the problem junction with TFL or the borough.

Headhuunter

Haven't read all the comments above but this is exactly what happened to me and the motorist was found to be wholly at fault. If you're turning across another lane of traffic it's up to you to check that nothing is coming through and that goes for bikes too. The problem is that motorists often "flash" each other through in situations like this and the turning driver rushes through so's not to hold up traffic and hits cyclists (or motorcyclists) who are still proceeding through and do not need to queue in traffic...

Headhuunter

BillyMansell wrote:

dhope wrote:

Both have a responsibility of course. The fault would lie with the car though as it is crossing another lane of traffic. The cyclist is simply staying in their lane going forward.

It's not as simple as saying it's the motorist's fault just because they are crossing another lane of traffic as that sets a dangerous precedent where some cyclists may perceive they always have the right of way when going forward or using cycle lanes (the belief in a protected road space possibly adding to the perception of right of way). Every situation has to be judged and every hazard perceived on it's own merit.

There's been more than one situation where I've had an accident that wasn't my fault but had I perceived the dangers better I may have avoided the accidents altogether. That's not excusing bad driving but I'd rather not have accidents in the first place and getting hit and injured can't be the best way of finding fault in others or proving our right to be on the road.

How could it not be the driver's fault? Yes it would be imprudent for the cyclist to be proceeding through a junction like that at full pelt but traffic moving straight on through a junction has priority over traffic turning. End of....

EKE_38BPM

Origamist wrote:

EKE_38BPM wrote:

If proper observation and signals are used, stopping at the side of the road shouldn't present a major danger, certainly no more than attempting to negotiate a dangerous junction. Many journeys on a bike start and end at the side of a road, this shouldn't be seen as a reason not to get off of your bike.

Getting hit from behind behind by a fellow cyclist is something that happens - particularly if you are pulling left to the kerb when faced with a green light at a junction. Shoulder check, indicate and shout "stopping" is my approach.

Yes, journeys start and end at the side of the road, but most people I have seen who use the pavement to avoid traffic lights, large stationary vehicles, queues, junctions etc etc do this hurriedly i.e they ride on the pavement, over the side road, or push their bike whilst running. When your rushing, you're more likely to make a mistake, like Willy Weasel.

A sizeable proportion of cyclist injuries are when they rejoin the traffic lane. I'd hazard this is because many people are still in "cyclist" mode and do not have the mindset of a pedestrian when making like a penguin and pushing their steed.

EKE_38BPM wrote:

Railings are more of an issue to stopping cyclists getting off of their bikes. I think that if I wanted to get off of my bike because of stationary traffic and a dangerous junction, I would turn left into the junction (not as dangerous as going across) and either performing a U turn in the minor road if safe, or getting off of my bike in the side road, crossing it on foot and remounting my bike. Yes, it would be slower, but also safer.

Thankfully, railings are slowly being removed from many boroughs of London.

Turning left into a side road only to U-turn does not sound appealing - firstly, because in the OP's example there is a large vehicle at the front of the queue, obscuring traffic and with the potential to turn left, and secondly, because U-turns are unpredictable.

EKE_38BPM wrote:

If the major road had many junctions like this, it would be a bummer. Its not a problem I've ever encountered (feeling so unsafe that I've felt the need to walk past many junctions), but I like to think that I wouldn't be so overconfident that I would be adamant about continuing to ride on a road which I felt unsafe on.
Generally, I wait in the traffic stream and filter on the right when safe, but I know there are few hard and fast rules on what it is safest to do and decisions have to be made at the time in rapidly changing situations.

I think the OP would do well to reconsider his/her route, if this is a constant problem. When I lived a few hundred metres from the A23, I would very rarely use it, preferring different roads.

Where we agree, is that I would not rule out dismounting and using the pavement. That said, it's an approach that I rarely adopt as I'm not that confident it's an appropriate method to negotiate stopped traffic at London's many box juncitons.

If I kept on having difficulties, I would consider a) avoiding the junction(s), b) cycle training and c) highlighting the problem junction with TFL or the borough.

I can't be bothered to go through your post point by point, but there isn't much need to, anyway, as we are very broadly in agreement.
Plan your route, get cycle training, implement that training, don't think that because you are doing the right thing you are in a "'elf and safety" bubble, and act accordingly.