hit and squashed
- Thread starter Jake
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
hackbike 666
Guest
That report is right there,there is some terrible layouts of roads for cyclists which is just asking for trouble.
Im sure being allowed to disobey traffic lights is asking for trouble as well.
Im sure being allowed to disobey traffic lights is asking for trouble as well.
OP
OP
Jake
New Member
terrible story written by the paramedic, very sad. There are flowers and notes tied to the post on the corner at the moment, had a quick read yesterday on way to gym. It is a dangerous crossroads with cars, (like everywhere now), just going through red lights. its just a waste of a young life, or any life at all.
Origamist
Legendary Member
magnatom said:Of course we can't speculate on these particular incidents, what I think the LTOR would do (and I've said this elsewhere) is encourage cyclists to left filter up to lights.
Imagine a fairly inexperienced cyclist moving to the front of the queue...
Should I filter on the right (safer) or left....mmmmm. Oh yes, if I filter on the left I'll be able to sneek round to the left at the lights, as Boris said it's ok.......
As for free training, I agree it needs some serious advertisement, but this is exactly what Boris and others should be focusing on if they REALLY want to make a difference. Playing about at the edges, changing rules etc, won't make much difference and, if done incorrectly as I think is the case here, can do more harm than good.
It might encourage more kerbside filtering, pedestrian collisions, etc, but it would likely discourage cyclists positioning themselves to the front left of HGVs (in a blindspot).
I'm unsure about the proposal and I've used RTOR in the US and cycled in the Netherlands (where you get a nice green arrow) - so I'd like to see a trial here.
Incidentally, 30 years or so ago the idea of LTOR (for all vehicles) was dismissed by the then Transport Secretary, so we'll have to see what happens this time...
Politicians will always tinker with cycling policy as they have no intention of seriously challenging the prevailing autocentricity in this country.
Bikeabilty is available outside London! It can be free or subsidised too...
Origamist said:
True, but it would encourage cyclists to filter up to the front down the left of the HGV (passing through blind spots).
I still maintain that it is safer to wait a few cars back in the queue. I've had my fair share of incidents since I have commuted to work, but I have never had a problem pulling into a traffic queue a couple of cars back.
hackbike 666
Guest
It might encourage more kerbside filtering, pedestrian collisions, etc, but it would likely discourage cyclists positioning themselves to the front left of HGVs (in a blindspot).
Yes a plus and a minus there.
Yes a plus and a minus there.
ed_o_brain
Guest
I think we should get rid of cycle lanes on the left handside on the approach to a junction.
They tell people "it's okay to ride up to the junction on the left hand side, it's a lane for cyclists to use irrespective of which direction they/other traffic".
It's silly when you think about it.
They tell people "it's okay to ride up to the junction on the left hand side, it's a lane for cyclists to use irrespective of which direction they/other traffic".
It's silly when you think about it.
Arch
Married to Night Train
- Location
- Salford, UK
buggi said:
I don't think that's valid. Women learn to drive as much as men do, and that's the only contact most men have with a real large vehicle. I see as many men make stupid moves around big vehicles as I do women.
And of course women can learn from men's examples, what do you mean? Surely you don't think all women only learn about nail polish because they only read Cosmo, or something?
Origamist
Legendary Member
ed_o_brain said:
Feeder lanes are in some ways a symptom of undertaking at junctions - the vast majority of cyclists do it, regardless of whether a feeder lane is present or not. A campaign highlighting the dangers of (kerbside) filtering in these situations and/or training would be a better alternative IMO. That said, I am sympathetic to your view!
Crankarm
Guru
- Location
- Nr Cambridge
Very very sad. My heart felt sympathies to the friends and families of the deceased cyclists. Such a waste.
The proportion of female cyclists who collide with HGVs seems to be higher than for male cyclists. Is this a fair assessment solely from the incidents that seem to make the media and newspapers, and if so, why are so many ladies being seriously or fatally injured when manoeuvring around HGVs?
Training is a solution but how do you reach everyone for at some point everyone rides a bike. School proficiency testing. Used to be compulsory in my day. How about public information ads similar to those for motor bike ads Think bike! aimed at the cyclist/HGV/bus pinch points?
Remove railings at these pinch points. So cyclists have an escape area.
Better HGV and PSV training. Much stiffer penalties and punishments, although the driver in one of the collisions is thankfully being charged with causing death by dangerous driving. The law also needs to change so that the presumption where a road user, other than another vehicle user, is injured ie pedestrian, cyclist, horse rider, is such that the driver of the vehicle is PRESUMED to have been driving negligently (at fault) unless they can prove otherwise. The legal test for them to satisfy that they were not driving negligently should be clear, difficult to avoid and have a criminal standard of proof ie beyond reasonable doubt. This would also greatly help in a subsequent civil claim by an injured claimant against a negligent driver and their insurer for the defendant could not easily rebut the presumption that they were driving negligently or that it was for the injured claimant to establish that the defendant driver was driving negligently. An automatic presumption of negligence against the defendant would be mean the defendant was liable and therefore liability would not then be an issue which is often not the case when the defendant driver is not prosecuted or found not guilty of motoring offences under the criminal law where the standard of proof is much higher and more difficult to prove.
Ultimately the only way to prevent these tragedies happening in urban areas is to have separate cycle paths totally from road traffic as in parts of France, Holland and Germany. But that is NEVER going to happen in the UK unfortunately as there is not the will or the money. Especially with a buffoon of a mayor Boris in charge of London. I mean LTOR/RTOR is a recipe for disaster with such little space on London roads it can only encourage cyclists to cycle along the nearside of a large vehicle. Cyclists should have their own time slots at all traffic light controlled junctions to safely cross as do pedestrians and cars.
Also I don't think filtering on the left or nearside is dangerous when there is adequate space or the driver of the vehicle(s) you are passing has seen you, but that it only becomes dangerous when space is limited or the driver of the vehicle has not seen you thus does not know you are there. With cars even if they do not initially see you they can see if they look properly in mirrors or turn their heads or alternatively when you bang on the side.....they should vere away or stop unless they have malevolent intent (lets not go there). With articluated HGVs the driver will unfortunately not know if anyone such as a cyclist is in close proximity to his vehicle and with in a blind spot so this can be very dangerous when they manouevre around junctions as spaces that cyclist(s) or pedestrians(s) thought were available and they were safe in rapidly disappear as the rear wheels of the trailer (or bus) come around crushing a cyclist(s) or pedestrian(s). It is up to cyclists not to put them selves at risk by riding into or being caught in these areas around an HGV or bus.
The proportion of female cyclists who collide with HGVs seems to be higher than for male cyclists. Is this a fair assessment solely from the incidents that seem to make the media and newspapers, and if so, why are so many ladies being seriously or fatally injured when manoeuvring around HGVs?
Training is a solution but how do you reach everyone for at some point everyone rides a bike. School proficiency testing. Used to be compulsory in my day. How about public information ads similar to those for motor bike ads Think bike! aimed at the cyclist/HGV/bus pinch points?
Remove railings at these pinch points. So cyclists have an escape area.
Better HGV and PSV training. Much stiffer penalties and punishments, although the driver in one of the collisions is thankfully being charged with causing death by dangerous driving. The law also needs to change so that the presumption where a road user, other than another vehicle user, is injured ie pedestrian, cyclist, horse rider, is such that the driver of the vehicle is PRESUMED to have been driving negligently (at fault) unless they can prove otherwise. The legal test for them to satisfy that they were not driving negligently should be clear, difficult to avoid and have a criminal standard of proof ie beyond reasonable doubt. This would also greatly help in a subsequent civil claim by an injured claimant against a negligent driver and their insurer for the defendant could not easily rebut the presumption that they were driving negligently or that it was for the injured claimant to establish that the defendant driver was driving negligently. An automatic presumption of negligence against the defendant would be mean the defendant was liable and therefore liability would not then be an issue which is often not the case when the defendant driver is not prosecuted or found not guilty of motoring offences under the criminal law where the standard of proof is much higher and more difficult to prove.
Ultimately the only way to prevent these tragedies happening in urban areas is to have separate cycle paths totally from road traffic as in parts of France, Holland and Germany. But that is NEVER going to happen in the UK unfortunately as there is not the will or the money. Especially with a buffoon of a mayor Boris in charge of London. I mean LTOR/RTOR is a recipe for disaster with such little space on London roads it can only encourage cyclists to cycle along the nearside of a large vehicle. Cyclists should have their own time slots at all traffic light controlled junctions to safely cross as do pedestrians and cars.
Also I don't think filtering on the left or nearside is dangerous when there is adequate space or the driver of the vehicle(s) you are passing has seen you, but that it only becomes dangerous when space is limited or the driver of the vehicle has not seen you thus does not know you are there. With cars even if they do not initially see you they can see if they look properly in mirrors or turn their heads or alternatively when you bang on the side.....they should vere away or stop unless they have malevolent intent (lets not go there). With articluated HGVs the driver will unfortunately not know if anyone such as a cyclist is in close proximity to his vehicle and with in a blind spot so this can be very dangerous when they manouevre around junctions as spaces that cyclist(s) or pedestrians(s) thought were available and they were safe in rapidly disappear as the rear wheels of the trailer (or bus) come around crushing a cyclist(s) or pedestrian(s). It is up to cyclists not to put them selves at risk by riding into or being caught in these areas around an HGV or bus.
Arch said:
Put it this way, I know two cyclists that have been killed, both were female, both were very experienced, both were hit by left turning lorries.
Therefore from my point of view, if as a cyclist you are going to get hit, it is far more likely you will be a woman and it will be a left turning lorry.
There have been a couple of far more scientific studies that have come to similar conclusions.
Origamist
Legendary Member
A lot of sensible suggestions, CA, but many are unlikely to see the light of day at the moment (strict liability being the most obvious, but nationwide, school cycling proficiency is also, sadly, unlikely in the current climate).
Less railings would be something to champion, as would the concept of naked streets in certain environments. Greater HGV training, use of correct mirrors, re-design of cabs etc are all key.
Undertaking also means an increased likelihood of a dooring.
The real problem is that cyclists don't like to lose momentum and if a gap on the nearside presents itself, too many squeeze through, regardless.
Less railings would be something to champion, as would the concept of naked streets in certain environments. Greater HGV training, use of correct mirrors, re-design of cabs etc are all key.
Undertaking also means an increased likelihood of a dooring.
The real problem is that cyclists don't like to lose momentum and if a gap on the nearside presents itself, too many squeeze through, regardless.
benborp
Guru
- Location
- further from Penge
I'm sorry for the length of this post but I need to get things off my chest. I mentioned earlier that I had expended a little thought on the vagaries of the E&C road system and been surprised at how much I have become accustomed to the hazards these particular roads present. Having read more about recent events and developments in this area of London I think this thread is the right place to question the responsibilities of the authorities that exert influence over the planning of traffic infrastructure and the enforcement of traffic policing in London.
I've already mentioned that with the presence of the pedestrian underpasses at the E&C the gyratory uses all of the available space and leaves no escape route for cyclists: even with the removal of any railings the opportunity for a larger vehicle to crush an object on its inside as it exits will still exist.
- another consequence of the fact that the road space is extended to the largest extent possible is that there is, in some respects, too much space; vehicles can take varying lines at high speed: drivers have plenty of opportunity to overtake, undertake and cut corners (esp. those driving aggressively to take advantage of all the merging necessary on a road system that goes from four to two to three lanes and back). There are times when most people use the junctions in this manner and the unpredictable surprise is to find someone following their lane to their exit amongst the anarchy.
- the way the junctions are affected by congestion is unpredictable. Traffic can be extremely heavy on one side of a roundabout forcing traffic to use the lanes as intended and on the other free flowing resulting in drivers trying to maintain 40mph+ and cutting from lane 1 to 3 and back to 1 in less than a handful of seconds. Sometimes this effect is apparent in adjacent lanes. None of this is conducive to the safe passage of cycles.
- the effect that having two light controlled entrances and two give way junctions onto the larger gyratory is not good for the safety of cyclists in my view. Traffic bottles up at the lights and races the traffic merging from the next junction often at the expense of the safety of slower cyclists, and cyclists will often find themselves just ahead or behind the stream of traffic that has entered the junction at the lights and in prime position for a SMIDSY from the joining traffic.
- on the smaller roundabout traffic on the inside lane from Newington Butts often fails to yield to traffic on the junction. Their view of the roundabout is often obstructed by vehicles in lane two that are looking to maintain progress across the junction but slow late and the driver on the inside ends up carrying too much speed to give way. Drivers in this lane are also provided with an impulse to proceed onto the junction when they shouldn't by traffic passing on their inside in the bus lane which in effect by-passes the roundabout (this now includes PTWs crossing at speed which makes entering the bus lane hairier). With the following traffic looking to pass at the same point the situation frequently arises where three motorized vehicles are aiming for the same space all seemingly oblivious to the fact that it is currently occupied by a cyclist.
- the bus stops on either side of Elephant and Castle itself (the road that joins the two roundabouts) often overflow causing buses to double park and thus presenting difficulties for cyclists, especially as these points coincide with where other drivers will want to cut in from the outside to make the 'left turn only' lane on to each roundabout. This is even worse southbound as the road surface is badly distorted by the buses - making the business of pulling out of the frequent left hooks even more difficult.
- drivers are frequently confused by the road layout and therefore make mistakes. Either through a risky and rushed attempt to make a turn from a poor road position or through distraction and lack of awareness of surrounding traffic the consideration of cyclists is often discarded when motorists make sudden changes of direction. (My only accident at the E&C was when I was rear ended while traveling at thirty by a car crossing three lanes who simply drove through me as he wasn't looking ahead.)
- pedestrians don't have an easy time of it at E&C and are often stranded on islands waiting ages for a green man. Often there isn't a reasonable walkable route where one would be expected and people are left with awkward choices. All of this leads to sudden dashes across the roads that exit the main gyratory - particularly towards the bus stops.
Of course, all of the above issues don't happen in isolation and anyone navigating the E&C is likely to have to compromise their attempts to mitigate one hazard in order not to set themselves up for an unacceptably risky passage through the next. A cyclist will often find themselves where they wouldn't plan to be because they have had to react to another road user's actions (as an example a friend of mine was forced onto the access road across the main roundabout by an emerging car, as he made his way across he was then doored by the occupant of a service vehicle). All of the above is unreasonably long winded, but these are the thought processes that occupy me over a relatively short stretch of my commute and I think that it is unreasonable to expect every user of this junction to go through such a list and be expected to make the right call every time.
The whole area was set to be completely redeveloped by 2012 but those plans have now been thrown into doubt by various political maneuvers; this being the case it is imperitive that an interim solution is found to the difficulties that cyclists face in this area. I believe there are solutions to the problems that I have brought up and I don't think that it is acceptable that such an outdated traffic system should be allowed to continue in existence for any longer- especially considering the price that has already been paid.
I could probably also ramble on a fair amount about Blackfriars Bridge and a bit more about law enforcement, but I won't.
I've already mentioned that with the presence of the pedestrian underpasses at the E&C the gyratory uses all of the available space and leaves no escape route for cyclists: even with the removal of any railings the opportunity for a larger vehicle to crush an object on its inside as it exits will still exist.
- another consequence of the fact that the road space is extended to the largest extent possible is that there is, in some respects, too much space; vehicles can take varying lines at high speed: drivers have plenty of opportunity to overtake, undertake and cut corners (esp. those driving aggressively to take advantage of all the merging necessary on a road system that goes from four to two to three lanes and back). There are times when most people use the junctions in this manner and the unpredictable surprise is to find someone following their lane to their exit amongst the anarchy.
- the way the junctions are affected by congestion is unpredictable. Traffic can be extremely heavy on one side of a roundabout forcing traffic to use the lanes as intended and on the other free flowing resulting in drivers trying to maintain 40mph+ and cutting from lane 1 to 3 and back to 1 in less than a handful of seconds. Sometimes this effect is apparent in adjacent lanes. None of this is conducive to the safe passage of cycles.
- the effect that having two light controlled entrances and two give way junctions onto the larger gyratory is not good for the safety of cyclists in my view. Traffic bottles up at the lights and races the traffic merging from the next junction often at the expense of the safety of slower cyclists, and cyclists will often find themselves just ahead or behind the stream of traffic that has entered the junction at the lights and in prime position for a SMIDSY from the joining traffic.
- on the smaller roundabout traffic on the inside lane from Newington Butts often fails to yield to traffic on the junction. Their view of the roundabout is often obstructed by vehicles in lane two that are looking to maintain progress across the junction but slow late and the driver on the inside ends up carrying too much speed to give way. Drivers in this lane are also provided with an impulse to proceed onto the junction when they shouldn't by traffic passing on their inside in the bus lane which in effect by-passes the roundabout (this now includes PTWs crossing at speed which makes entering the bus lane hairier). With the following traffic looking to pass at the same point the situation frequently arises where three motorized vehicles are aiming for the same space all seemingly oblivious to the fact that it is currently occupied by a cyclist.
- the bus stops on either side of Elephant and Castle itself (the road that joins the two roundabouts) often overflow causing buses to double park and thus presenting difficulties for cyclists, especially as these points coincide with where other drivers will want to cut in from the outside to make the 'left turn only' lane on to each roundabout. This is even worse southbound as the road surface is badly distorted by the buses - making the business of pulling out of the frequent left hooks even more difficult.
- drivers are frequently confused by the road layout and therefore make mistakes. Either through a risky and rushed attempt to make a turn from a poor road position or through distraction and lack of awareness of surrounding traffic the consideration of cyclists is often discarded when motorists make sudden changes of direction. (My only accident at the E&C was when I was rear ended while traveling at thirty by a car crossing three lanes who simply drove through me as he wasn't looking ahead.)
- pedestrians don't have an easy time of it at E&C and are often stranded on islands waiting ages for a green man. Often there isn't a reasonable walkable route where one would be expected and people are left with awkward choices. All of this leads to sudden dashes across the roads that exit the main gyratory - particularly towards the bus stops.
Of course, all of the above issues don't happen in isolation and anyone navigating the E&C is likely to have to compromise their attempts to mitigate one hazard in order not to set themselves up for an unacceptably risky passage through the next. A cyclist will often find themselves where they wouldn't plan to be because they have had to react to another road user's actions (as an example a friend of mine was forced onto the access road across the main roundabout by an emerging car, as he made his way across he was then doored by the occupant of a service vehicle). All of the above is unreasonably long winded, but these are the thought processes that occupy me over a relatively short stretch of my commute and I think that it is unreasonable to expect every user of this junction to go through such a list and be expected to make the right call every time.
The whole area was set to be completely redeveloped by 2012 but those plans have now been thrown into doubt by various political maneuvers; this being the case it is imperitive that an interim solution is found to the difficulties that cyclists face in this area. I believe there are solutions to the problems that I have brought up and I don't think that it is acceptable that such an outdated traffic system should be allowed to continue in existence for any longer- especially considering the price that has already been paid.
I could probably also ramble on a fair amount about Blackfriars Bridge and a bit more about law enforcement, but I won't.
hackbike 666
Guest
I could probably also ramble on a fair amount about Blackfriars Bridge and a bit more about law enforcement, but I won't.
Your views on Blackfriars Bridge interest me as I have used this bridge for years as with Southwark Bridge.Southwark Bridge can be nasty with the lorries and Buses.
Im not very keen on the London Bridge layout although ironically I had a ped collision on Tower Bridge (1991)
Waterloo Bridge?
Your views on Blackfriars Bridge interest me as I have used this bridge for years as with Southwark Bridge.Southwark Bridge can be nasty with the lorries and Buses.
Im not very keen on the London Bridge layout although ironically I had a ped collision on Tower Bridge (1991)
Waterloo Bridge?
Origamist
Legendary Member
Benborp, a good summary of the problems.
As regards the E&C redevelopment - the Mayor kiboshed Southwark Council's proposal to change the road layout last autumn, citing increased traffic delays as the reason...
More detail here: http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/3613
As regards the E&C redevelopment - the Mayor kiboshed Southwark Council's proposal to change the road layout last autumn, citing increased traffic delays as the reason...
More detail here: http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/3613
Similar threads
