RLJ'ed today for genuine reason but got told off!

macleod113

Hi All,

on my commute i sometimes travel along a busy A road which has a cut off to a small village with a filter lane and traffic light for a right turn. the filter lane has those sensor strips in the road but my bike doesnt trigger them. i can sometimes be stuck at the junction permanently until another car comes along. being access to a small village its not very often.
i took the choice to jump the red light today after checking all was safe. there was a woman in a car sat opposite me waiting to come onto the A road from the village road and wound her window down to ask why i ran a red light (her traffic lights arent sync'ed with mine BTW). i stopped and mentioned the facts but she was less than impressed. it was a nice chat and i tried to explain why i did it but she wasnt interested.

what would you guys do? i feel wrong but felt i had to do that to get to work on time. i cant simply wait several minutes and more for a car to take the turning can i?

slowbike

I'd probably do the same as you ... but if you need to be whiter than white then walk across the road.

macleod113

Yes, you are right, walking would have been the better thing to do. next time. i like the route so will do that from now on. why didnt i think of that this morning :-s

cookeeemonster

Well you're not going on my naughty list of RLJ'ers

I think you should complain to whoever the hell is responsible for the light - they have a duty to work for all road users not just cars...pretty bad that they allow these things on the road.

lancew

If you really want to get through the light but don't want to feel bad about being a RLJ'er just get off the bike and walk it across the road?

Otherwise I agree with what you did, its fair play if you've been stuck there. Everyone has a few sets of lights that they know work badly.

markhewitt1978

CookeeeMonster wrote:

I think you should complain to whoever the hell is responsible for the light - they have a duty to work for all road users not just cars...pretty bad that they allow these things on the road.

+1. Complain to the local authority, they'll put it on the list. It could be that it has a faulty sensor.

dav1

I agree as well. I occasionally end up at lights that don't detect cyclists and after waiting a couple of complete cycles of the lights changing I will go.

I'm not sure how this would be interpreted by the highway code. I assume the "not working" part of rule 176 will apply in this case though.

176
You MUST NOT move forward over the white line when the red light is showing. Only go forward when the traffic lights are green if there is room for you to clear the junction safely or you are taking up a position to turn right. If the traffic lights are not working, treat the situation as you would an unmarked junction and proceed with great care.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 36

e999sam

I go through four sets of traffic lights early in the morning that work on sensors, one always works, one sometimes does and two never work. I always treat the ones that don't work as a give way. I have reported them to my local council but they haven't even replied to me.

unixnerd

There's one like that near Aberdeen on a very tight T-junction where one road goes over an old railway bridge (railway track has become a cycle path these days). Very quiet bit of road so I just carefully go through it.

bigmat

I would have done what you did, except I would have given the old busybody the finger rather than having a chat about it. :twisted:

Sirius631

You are allowed to pass red lights that are not working correctly. You could argue that traffic lights with sensor strips which do not detect you and do not have a reasonable default time-out period do not work correctly, hence you can pass them on red after a reasonable wait.

LiveGiantly

It's good you done all your checks, getting off your bike and walking across would of been good aswell...

steelmaximus

**Warning! The following post contains highly boring information on traffic signals and their operation. If you are feeling sleepy please take care not to doze off. Go out for a spin on your bike instead of sitting at a computer.**

Regarding the Highway code rule 176, the meaning of not working is that there is no lights showing. It's quite explicit, you don't cross the white line when the red light shows. Imagine if someone sat at a blind T junction on a red for a while just decided they must be faulty and pulled into the junction.

Signals are designed not to fail stuck on red. If the controller detects a fault which means the signals cannot operate safety, they will switch all the lights off and the junction becomes, as 176 states, an unmarked junction where no one has priority. This is mainly to cover the possibility of both red lights on one entry failing. All approaches should have two lights showing although only one is legally required. This allows for one to fail and time for the Traffic Signal dept to fix.

The detection loop (the black lines cut into the tarmac on the approach to the junctions) work on the same principle as a metal detector and will detect any metallic object that moves (note moves, that's an important bit) over the loop. However, the signals are also programmed to give each entry of the junction a turn once every three or four cycles, which allows for other non metallic road users such as horses or a very slow moving metallic vehicle. A good old fashioned steel bike has plenty of metal in it for the dectector loop but I suspect a full carbon probably doesn't; one up for the steely! The controller will also be programmed with a set of fixed times for the junction, in case one or more of the detector loops fails or is broken. Some of the more modern controllers can even let the Local Authority Traffic Signal department know that there is a fault on the junction, via a phone line or GSM module.

All that said, I find it really annoying when I'm sat at a junction on my bike thinking "I could quite safety clear this junction and these lights are really designed for all these large smelly metal boxes charging around and getting in each others way". Have I ever RLJ'ed....couldn't possibly say :oops: I suppose I could get off and walk. Then again I could just walk and not bother with a bike at all! On second thoughts, no.

samsbike

I had some prat who declined to go 2 feet in front so I could squeeze in the front rather than be trapped between a van and pavement (I admit my fault for expecting him to ride a bit forward, its seems motorcyclists are a lot better than most cyclists).

This holier than thou tosser, then goes on the green even though a ped was still crossing and was about a foot away from making the pavement.

The Rookie

steelmaximus wrote:

Regarding the Highway code rule 176, the meaning of not working is that there is no lights showing.

Please show us where it says that.....

cedargreen

steelmaximus wrote:

**

Signals are designed not to fail stuck on red. If the controller detects a fault which means the signals cannot operate safety, they will switch all the lights off and the junction becomes, as 176 states, an unmarked junction where no one has priority. This is mainly to cover the possibility of both red lights on one entry failing. All approaches should have two lights showing although only one is legally required. This allows for one to fail and time for the Traffic Signal dept to fix.

The detection loop (the black lines cut into the tarmac on the approach to the junctions) work on the same principle as a metal detector and will detect any metallic object that moves (note moves, that's an important bit) over the loop. However, the signals are also programmed to give each entry of the junction a turn once every three or four cycles, which allows for other non metallic road users such as horses or a very slow moving metallic vehicle. A good old fashioned steel bike has plenty of metal in it for the dectector loop but I suspect a full carbon probably doesn't; one up for the steely! The controller will also be programmed with a set of fixed times for the junction, in case one or more of the detector loops fails or is broken. Some of the more modern controllers can even let the Local Authority Traffic Signal department know that there is a fault on the junction, via a phone line or GSM module.

This I'm afraid is bollocks. Comprehensive bollocks but bollocks nonetheless. I know of at least 2 sets of lights near me which do not ever change when I approach on my (steel) bike, and since they are minor roads joining a main road it can be ages before a car comes along. They are definitely not programmed to 'give each entry of the junction a turn every 3 or 4 cycles'.

I wonder if you are a traffic engineer- it would explain your tendency to defend a road system designed exclusively around the needs of motor vehicles by resorting to dubious technical 'facts'.
I realise this is your first post, and accusing you of being a traffic engineer is akin to calling you pond life, but justifying the piss-poor way that 'infrastructure' works for cyclists is probably not a good way to start.

drlodge

steelmaximus wrote:

Regarding the Highway code rule 176, the meaning of not working is that there is no lights showing. It's quite explicit, you don't cross the white line when the red light shows.

This is only half the story. Things "don't work properly" for one of two reasons:
- they are defective in operation, which the above describes
- they are defective in design. This is the situation if the lights don't detect a bike approaching

The highway code therefore assumes that all traffic lights are desgined perfectly, which obviously isn't the case...

antsmithmk

BigMat wrote:

I would have given the old busybody the finger

Kinky

rolf_f

cedargreen wrote:

steelmaximus wrote:

**

Signals are designed not to fail stuck on red. If the controller detects a fault which means the signals cannot operate safety, they will switch all the lights off and the junction becomes, as 176 states, an unmarked junction where no one has priority. This is mainly to cover the possibility of both red lights on one entry failing. All approaches should have two lights showing although only one is legally required. This allows for one to fail and time for the Traffic Signal dept to fix.

The detection loop (the black lines cut into the tarmac on the approach to the junctions) work on the same principle as a metal detector and will detect any metallic object that moves (note moves, that's an important bit) over the loop. However, the signals are also programmed to give each entry of the junction a turn once every three or four cycles, which allows for other non metallic road users such as horses or a very slow moving metallic vehicle. A good old fashioned steel bike has plenty of metal in it for the dectector loop but I suspect a full carbon probably doesn't; one up for the steely! The controller will also be programmed with a set of fixed times for the junction, in case one or more of the detector loops fails or is broken. Some of the more modern controllers can even let the Local Authority Traffic Signal department know that there is a fault on the junction, via a phone line or GSM module.

This I'm afraid is ****. Comprehensive **** but **** nonetheless. I know of at least 2 sets of lights near me which do not ever change when I approach on my (steel) bike, and since they are minor roads joining a main road it can be ages before a car comes along. They are definitely not programmed to 'give each entry of the junction a turn every 3 or 4 cycles'.

I've experienced this as well - fortunately being rescued by a car (though one time I had to wait for a pedestrian to force the sequence as an idiot driver had stopped on green and it must have resulted in the cars behind being stationary over the sensors......)

Then there is the one on the end of the bus lane on Kirkstall Road, Leeds. Buses automatically trigger the light, bicycles don't. So you either have to wait for the light to eventually go green so that you can move forward onto the continuing cycle lane (ie the traffic lights aren't actually serving a purpose at all in stopping the bike) or you have to leave the bus lane/cycle lane before the end of it, join the road, go through the green light and back onto the cycle lane. I'd hope the traffic engineer would acknowledge that that is poor design as well!

Yes, lights are not always well designed.

The Rookie

In Coventry we have a couple of bus lane merges which are controlled by lights, you're allowed to cycle in the bus lane but the sensors don't 'see' you coming and the lights never change.....

Kieran_Burns

I was off on a ride yesterday (Sunday) and the only lights in the village have the sensors on them. It was early Sunday morning so no traffic came along behind me to set the lights off.

I just got off the bike, walked round and hopped on again. Sometimes you have to, and it is legal to do it this way.

I was perversely hoping someone might comment on it!