rant-red lights

kennygalbraith

Quite a common sight I suppose, cycling to work,overtake fellow cyclist further down the road you stop at the RED light and a few moments later your fellow cyclist saunters through the RED light totally not giving a shi*.
I wish people would follow the rules of the road....

rant over lol.

Jamie1966

Can i ask a question please, If you was to get off your bike at a red light and then go onto the pavement to carry on past the lights is this allowed?

Phil_D

Yes, but you have to lift the wheels of the bike off the road to be classed as a pedestrian

Phil_D

kennygalbraith wrote:

Quite a common sight I suppose, cycling to work,overtake fellow cyclist further down the road you stop at the RED light and a few moments later your fellow cyclist saunters through the RED light totally not giving a shi*.
I wish people would follow the rules of the road....

rant over lol.

As soon as they RLJ when you're racing them (even if they don't know you are racing them), they are cheats and disqualified. You win. You should be happy.

Kieran_Burns

Phil_D wrote:

Yes, but you have to lift the wheels of the bike off the road to be classed as a pedestrian

Not true.

Already been proven otherwise.

Phil_D

Kieran_Burns wrote:

Phil_D wrote:

Yes, but you have to lift the wheels of the bike off the road to be classed as a pedestrian

Not true.

Already been proven otherwise.

Really? I've been lifting my bike up for no reason then.

Thanks.

Jamie1966

Thank you

notsoblue

Yay! A red light thread!

Basically, the official line is that its ok to RLJ as long as you're wearing a helmet.

MrSweary

If only we had a thread for rants already...

Kieran_Burns

Phil_D wrote:

Kieran_Burns wrote:

Phil_D wrote:

Yes, but you have to lift the wheels of the bike off the road to be classed as a pedestrian

Not true.

Already been proven otherwise.

Really? I've been lifting my bike up for no reason then.

Thanks.

For example:

It is not illegal to cycle across a Zebra crossing if there is shared-use to either side, but it is contrary to Rule 64 of the Highway Code which states that cyclists should dismount and walk across Zebra crossings. Breach of the highway code could be used as evidence of an offence, eg cycling dangerously, or of evidence of negligence in the event of a
collision. [To date, there is insufficient evidence to suggest a change in Rule 64 of the Highway Code is needed and it is therefore not TfL’s intention to pursue this aspect]

from http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/ ... ssings.pdf

and:

https://www.gov.uk/rules-for-cyclists-5 ... d-79-to-82

4. Crossing the road (79 to 82)
79

Do not ride across equestrian crossings, as they are for horse riders only. Do not ride across a pelican, puffin or zebra crossing. Dismount and wheel your cycle across.
80

Toucan crossings. These are light-controlled crossings which allow cyclists and pedestrians to share crossing space and cross at the same time. They are push-button operated. Pedestrians and cyclists will see the green signal together. Cyclists are permitted to ride across.

jds_1981

There's a toucan crossing near old street

Toucan crossings. These are light-controlled crossings which allow cyclists and pedestrians to share crossing space and cross at the same time. They are push-button operated. Pedestrians and cyclists will see the green signal together. Cyclists are permitted to ride across.

I've only taken that route once. What actually happens is the lights are red for both pedestrians and cyclists. A gap appears in the traffic so the pedestrians start crossing, then the cyclists do (only the cyclist are breaking the law now.) Eventually I'm left by myself until the lights go green.
Ah, here we go. The pedestrians are not breaking the law. The people pushing their bikes are not, but the people cycling are.
https://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=51.526575,-0.083492&spn=0.000013,0.012263&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=51.526565,-0.083566&panoid=Leifqy0yBVmXv24QA8Cp7g&cbp=12,203.2,,0,5.24

arran77

notsoblue wrote:

Yay! A red light thread!

Basically, the official line is that its ok to RLJ as long as you're wearing a helmet.

Excellent, lets have a debate on the pros and cons of helmet wearing while we're about it

veronese68

arran77 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Yay! A red light thread!

Basically, the official line is that its ok to RLJ as long as you're wearing a helmet.

Excellent, lets have a debate on the pros and cons of helmet wearing while we're about it

Should we add hi viz and headphones just to be thorough?

notsoblue

Veronese68 wrote:

arran77 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Yay! A red light thread!

Basically, the official line is that its ok to RLJ as long as you're wearing a helmet.

Excellent, lets have a debate on the pros and cons of helmet wearing while we're about it

Should we add hi viz and headphones just to be thorough?

I hi-viz headphones should be compulsory.

keyser__soze

jds_1981 wrote:

There's a toucan crossing near old street

Ah, here we go. The pedestrians are not breaking the law. The people pushing their bikes are not, but the people cycling are.

Toucans are advisory, meaning you can cross even on red. We've done this before: viewtopic.php?f=40052&t=12840359

arran77

Veronese68 wrote:

arran77 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Yay! A red light thread!

Basically, the official line is that its ok to RLJ as long as you're wearing a helmet.

Excellent, lets have a debate on the pros and cons of helmet wearing while we're about it

Should we add hi viz and headphones just to be thorough?

Good idea, also some lights maybe, but what about a colour other than red for the back? I'm thinking of a flashing blue light maybe?

veronese68

I don't think anyone disagrees with the use of lights, I use mine in daylight as well though.
Now, hi viz headphones is interesting. Hi viz good countered with headphones bad could cause a persons head to explode due to hitting a yes/no resonant frequency of sanctiomniousness.

Initialised

Traffic lights should be Give Way for bikes unless there's a separate red/green signal for bikes. There should only be a red/green light for bikes if there is traffic crossing the carriageway from left or right, joining the carriageway from the left or there is a pedestrian crossing.

They are a crude attempt to automate a traffic policeman directing traffic, they are dumb (unless they are linked to an AI controlling traffic across an entire city) and probably cause more accidents and congestion than they solve.

While we're at it all ASLs should be backed up with cameras with fines and points given on a three strikes basis. But you wouldn't need ASLs if the law allowed junctions to be designed so bikes can move off while cars remain stationary and cyclists had priority in a zone maybe 20m leading up to the junction.

jds_1981

Keyser__Soze wrote:

jds_1981 wrote:

There's a toucan crossing near old street

Ah, here we go. The pedestrians are not breaking the law. The people pushing their bikes are not, but the people cycling are.

Toucans are advisory, meaning you can cross even on red. We've done this before: viewtopic.php?f=40052&t=12840359

Very interesting - I'd missed that discussion.

jds_1981

Pedestrian lights should be made smarter and so only turn on when someone is still stood there. Should also turn change quicker if there's a break in the traffic (thus avoiding people walking across before they change.)

Initialised

jds_1981 wrote:

Pedestrian lights should be made smarter and so only turn on when someone is still stood there. Should also turn change quicker if there's a break in the traffic (thus avoiding people walking across before they change.)

No lights should make you wait if there's no traffic in the other lanes. Like I said, they are mostly dumb and run on timers not sensors which is why they annoy so many road users into running reds.

However, I like the lights with speed sensors that change to red if you're speeding: http://articles.philly.com/2013-11-20/n ... it-sensors