Nearly a year since cyclist Emma Foa was killed

[Trevor A Panther]

"Colin McKenzie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Alan Braggins wrote:
>> If you are on a road where there would be room for car drivers to
>> overtake you safely in the secondary position, how many cars are you
>> going to unnecessarily obstruct just in case they are followed by
>> a left turning lorry that doesn't give you enough room?
>
> I'm going to be aware of what's behind me and treat each vehicle on its
> merits. If it's safe to let it pass, I will make it easy. If it isn't, I'll
> make it hard or impossible.
>
> Of course it doesn't always work, but at least I'll know very quickly if it
> hasn't - with time to do something about it.
>
>> If a lorry uses the next lane to get halfway through overtaking you
>> then pulls across into your lane, how much is Cyclecraft going to help?
>
> I'd be covering my brakes, and given no alternative I'd use them. An Air
> Zound is also useful in this situation.
>
>> Following Cyclecraft's advice can _reduce_ your danger, but some of the
>> comments in this thread suggesting that drivers who don't use their
>> mirrors are not a problem at all if you just avoid lorries are ignoring
>> reality.
>
> Certainly following Cyclecraft can't eliminate danger. Drivers not using
> mirrors are only a problem if I'm beside them. If I find myself in this
> position, and they have room to move, I will get out of it asap.
>
> Colin McKenzie
>
>
>
> --
> No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the
> population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking.
> Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.

The great thing about being in the primary position is that it gives you an
escape route on your left in the case of a driver trying to dominate the
position your are in! It is a huge asset!


If you are already in the gutter you are in trouble!

--
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom.
www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
>

 

[Rob Morley]

In article <[email protected]>, Colin McKenzie
[email protected] says...

> I also generally start on red/amber, if clear, to maximise my
> visibility, and IMO it would be beneficial if it were legal for
> cyclists to do this.
>
Only if you can stop cars going in the other directions from running the
lights. And how much resentment do you think this would cause in
motorists? Plus it fosters the notion that bikes aren't regular
traffic. Don't ASLs already cause enough damage by encouraging cyclists
to ride in the gutter on the approach to traffic lights?

 

[Rob Morley]

In article <1i9a67b.1cau6bz1n523s5N%
[email protected]>, Ekul Namsob
[email protected] says...

> Do you mean that your opinion is illogical? If not, quite what do you
> mean? (I don't mean that to sound cheeky, it's a genuine question.)
>
My response to Simon's comment wasn't logical (in the strict sense) but
I think my opinion is.

 

[Ian Smith]

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:08:01 -0000, Rob Morley <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, Colin McKenzie
> [email protected] says...
>
> > I also generally start on red/amber, if clear, to maximise my
> > visibility, and IMO it would be beneficial if it were legal for
> > cyclists to do this.
> >
> Only if you can stop cars going in the other directions from
> running the lights. And how much resentment do you think this
> would cause in motorists?

To be honest, I don't think I've seen a motorist wait for green in a
long time. Sometimes, if I'm in primary position and it's a junction
where doing so does prevent anything coming alongside, I wait for
green before setting off - and sometimes I get hooted for doing so.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

 

[Tom Crispin]

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:31:09 -0000, "PK" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>"Tom Crispin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 13:59:23 -0000, "PK" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> With hindsight there are certain things Emma could have done to lessen
>> the chances of her being killed. None of that in any way excuses the
>> driver for fiddling about with paperwork in his cab when he should
>> have been paying attention, in particular, looking in his mirrors.
>
>We are in agreement!
>
>> And had she taken primary position, what if the driver in the vehicle
>> behind had chosen to amber gamble (as 50% of motorists do) and she had
>> chosen to stop?
>
>
>cycle craft is clear: Primary position is the correct position approaching
>traffic lights.

Cyclecraft is advisory, not mandatory. It is likely that Emma Foa had
never heard of it. However, it is almost certain that she knew that
the truck driver was supposed to check his mirrors before turning
left.

>What position do you adopt?

It will depend on the circumstance, but provided turning left is
allowed I will always position myself so that it would be very
difficult for a left turning vehicle to pass me and then turn left. If
I am passing slow moving traffic I will nearly always pass on the
right, but even this isn't fool proof.

Approaching lights on red in Blackheath once, and filtering wide to
the right as there was no oncoming traffic, I was hit from behind by a
van who chose that moment to veer right to grap a parking spot on the
opposite side on the road, crossing zig-zags in the process.

www.johnballcycling.org.uk/misc/bheath

The orange line shows my route, the dotted line my intended route. The
red line shows where I was flung across the road. The blue line shows
the known route of the van, and the broken line his intended route.

Had I been riding in the gutter I would have been safe from his
antics.

 

[David Hansen]

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:40:13 +0000 someone who may be "J. Chisholm"
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>And note this:
>http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/cn_news_home/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=242432
>This was a pedestrian killed by a Tesco artic that got lost,

I doubt it very much.

You presumably meant to say that the driver got lost.

>and then the trailer mounted the pavement

Not on its own.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

 

[David Hansen]

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:10:23 -0000 someone who may be "PK"
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>> This is much more rare than being stopped at a set of lights and
>> having a lorry or car pull up alongside with its left indicator going.
>
>If you are in the middle of the lane he/she cannot do that.

Only if the road is one lane wide and there is an island.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

 

[The Luggage]

On 18 Dec, 16:18, "PK" <[email protected]> wrote:
....
> Just as motorists who put others at risk for the sake of a second or too
> deserver criticism, so too do cyclists who put them selves in danger by
> "undertaking stationary vehicles at traffic lights and all for a
> couple of yards of distance"

So why, oh why, oh why do traffic planners keep encouraging cyclists
to do exactly this, by installing ASLs and gutter cycle lanes at
junctions?

TL

 

[PK]

"The Luggage" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:fd97cf99-5286-4983-93eb-d8618fc6d599@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com...
> On 18 Dec, 16:18, "PK" <[email protected]> wrote:
> ...
>> Just as motorists who put others at risk for the sake of a second or too
>> deserver criticism, so too do cyclists who put them selves in danger by
>> "undertaking stationary vehicles at traffic lights and all for a
>> couple of yards of distance"
>
> So why, oh why, oh why do traffic planners keep encouraging cyclists
> to do exactly this, by installing ASLs and gutter cycle lanes at
> junctions?
>
> TL

Used sensibly - only passing immediately after the light goes red - they are
useful, but they do tempt the inexperienced into error
pk

 

[Martin Dann]

The Luggage wrote:
> On 18 Dec, 16:18, "PK" <[email protected]> wrote:
> ...
>> Just as motorists who put others at risk for the sake of a second or too
>> deserver criticism, so too do cyclists who put them selves in danger by
>> "undertaking stationary vehicles at traffic lights and all for a
>> couple of yards of distance"
>
> So why, oh why, oh why do traffic planners keep encouraging cyclists
> to do exactly this, by installing ASLs and gutter cycle lanes at
> junctions?

There are government stats. that show that ASLs improve road safety for
cyclists. (I am not going to try digging them up.)

 

[Martin Dann]

Ian Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:08:01 -0000, Rob Morley <[email protected]> wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>, Colin McKenzie
>> [email protected] says...
>>
>>> I also generally start on red/amber, if clear, to maximise my
>>> visibility, and IMO it would be beneficial if it were legal for
>>> cyclists to do this.

I often start on red/amber if it is clear, but would prefer the law to
remain as it is.
If starting on red/amber was legalised for cyclists, then more motorised
traffic would also start on red/amber, and the phasing of traffic lights
might have to be altered.

>> Only if you can stop cars going in the other directions from
>> running the lights. And how much resentment do you think this
>> would cause in motorists?
>
> To be honest, I don't think I've seen a motorist wait for green in a
> long time. Sometimes, if I'm in primary position and it's a junction
> where doing so does prevent anything coming alongside, I wait for
> green before setting off - and sometimes I get hooted for doing so.

I notice many motorists put their cars into gear, and move the clutch to
the biteing point on red/amber, but pull away the instant the lights go
green. For me the extra second starting gives an opportunity to get
clipped in and part of the way across the junction before they try to
side swipe me.

 

[Trevor A Panther]

"The Luggage" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:fd97cf99-5286-4983-93eb-d8618fc6d599@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com...
> On 18 Dec, 16:18, "PK" <[email protected]> wrote:
> ...
>> Just as motorists who put others at risk for the sake of a second or too
>> deserver criticism, so too do cyclists who put them selves in danger by
>> "undertaking stationary vehicles at traffic lights and all for a
>> couple of yards of distance"
>
> So why, oh why, oh why do traffic planners keep encouraging cyclists
> to do exactly this, by installing ASLs and gutter cycle lanes at
> junctions?
>
> TL

They can "encourage" as much as they like!
I never use the ridiculous mini approach lanes to an ASL -- they are too
dangerous and I wait in the normal traffic line. I do use ASL's if I happen to
be at the front of the queue!

--
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom.
www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

 

[Jeremy Parker]

"Martin Dann" <[email protected]> wrote

[snip]

> There are government stats. that show that ASLs improve road safety
> for cyclists. (I am not going to try digging them up.)

I don't know about gov't statistics, but there are Hull statistics,
recently posted on the Cycling England web site showing that they do
improve road safety and London Statistics that they don't. See the
Transport for London web site www.tfl.gov.uk For London's info' go to
the "business and partners" section, and then look at the
publications - cycling stuff. There's a 2005 velo city paper which
summarizes the London stuff nicely, along with some newer info

Jeremy Parker

 

[Tim Hall]

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 18:31:18 GMT, "Trevor A Panther"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
>"The Luggage" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:fd97cf99-5286-4983-93eb-d8618fc6d599@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com...
>> On 18 Dec, 16:18, "PK" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> ...
>>> Just as motorists who put others at risk for the sake of a second or too
>>> deserver criticism, so too do cyclists who put them selves in danger by
>>> "undertaking stationary vehicles at traffic lights and all for a
>>> couple of yards of distance"
>>
>> So why, oh why, oh why do traffic planners keep encouraging cyclists
>> to do exactly this, by installing ASLs and gutter cycle lanes at
>> junctions?
>>
>> TL
>
>They can "encourage" as much as they like!
>I never use the ridiculous mini approach lanes to an ASL -- they are too
>dangerous and I wait in the normal traffic line. I do use ASL's if I happen to
>be at the front of the queue!


Ah! I thought I was the only one.


--

Tim

fast and gripping, non pompous, glossy and credible.