Please DON'T do this!

[marinyork]

It's not irrelevent and fatuous at all. You're new here and maybe unaware that people post these videos as examples of outrageous behaviour and want an analysis of them. The arguments that follow normally bring up issues not considered by the person that made the video and can get somewhat heated. I and one other poster have merely pointed out where things stand in an uncommented area which interestingly enough highlights perfectly why cycle lanes can be bad. While we're on the topic of waiting, it applies equally to the bus driver, waiting until they are able to cross the cycle lane safely without breaching the lane at an earlier point. People are prejudging here that cycle lanes are crap or impractical to give the bus driver the benefit of the doubt. I quite agree the lane is crap but there is no excusing the driver being in the cycle lane.

You're also talking about behaviour. There's no question the cyclist should have held back. In the cold light of day in the event of the collision and the cyclist getting killed the bus driver would have to answer why they were in the cycle lane. If I were an insurer or a copper I would give some of the blame to the bus driver. There are however some things in the bus driver's favour, they did indicate.

A much better example of a video of this behaviour would be the same playout but without the cycle lane.

 

[HLaB]

I've seen plenty of similar instances the message just isn't getting across the CTC or somebody should start a national and well advertised campaign. What did the numpty think, rog was just sitting there because he likes buses; the left turn indicator highlights what could of happened next. Yet the cyclist still tried to go through, what if the bus had delayed the indicator would he have went all the way through until he was wiped out

 

[LOGAN 5]

Down the Strand in London the other week 1 cyclist "squeezed" past a lorry negotiatiing a roadwork and another trying to do the same but the lorry moved and she was forced to stop abruptly at the start of the maneouvre. I couldn't stop from saying to her "please" don't ever do that agan and explained about the fatalities in London involving lorries. She seemed totally unaware of the danger she was in. I don't usually talk (or lecture) to other cylists but I couldn't help myself. Maybe she won't be the next casualty in London

 

[Crankarm]

You're new here .....

So........your point?

.....examples of outrageous behaviour

you're not wrong there........breathtakingly poor cycling

........and want an analysis of them.

I don't think so. The person who captured the incident has posted the footage as a plea for cyclists not to do the same as it is dangerous.

The arguments that follow normally bring up issues not considered by the person that made the video and can get somewhat heated.

Why? The message given by the poster is clear "DO NOT DO THIS!"

I and one other poster have merely pointed out

You and one other poster the only ones in 4 pages of postings!!! You are clearly in the majority then.

where things stand in an uncommented area which interestingly enough highlights perfectly why cycle lanes can be bad.

What's bad about the cycle lane and the positioning of the bus given that the instant cyclist is approaching the bus at some speed from behind? The bus is a much larger vehicle and is in front whether he is in the bus lane or not is irrelevant. The point is that there is very little space between it and the adjacent kerb meaning it is hazardous and dangerous to pass or under take along it's nearside.

While we're on the topic of waiting, it applies equally to the bus driver, waiting until they are able to cross the cycle lane safely without breaching the lane at an earlier point.

How come? You have seen the same footage as I have or are you in possession of other evidence or footage form another camera? The bus was considerably in front of the cyclist who rapidly approached the rear of the bus trying to force their way down the nearside tight against the kerb and unless you have not realised passing the cyclist who was filming him or her doing so. Which piece of the footage is confusing you? IT IS DANGEROUS.
The cyclist was behind the bus and nearly collided with it. In law if you run into the back of another vehicle you are liable cycle lane or not. The liability should there be any injury to the cyclist would lie with the cyclist given the footage. If the cyclist was alongside the front of the vehicle and the bus driver had not seen the cyclist and they were crushed then yes liability may well be contested and but be found to lie with the bus driver. But this instance is clear cut.

Presuming there are no other cyclists on his nearside the bus driver has as you have suggested positioned his bus so it is partially in the cycle lane. If it was clear to do so when he did this he has done nothing wrong. Buses and all other motorised vehicles can use cycle lanes on the road that have broken edged lines and bikes can share use with bus lanes.
There is nothing wrong here. The driver may have had to position his bus as the footage showed because the width of the carriageway ahead of the bus became restricted or there was an obstruction on the offside necessitating him to move toward the kerb or that he was approaching or leaving a bus stop. Buses do frequently stop to pick up and set down passengers so this is not totally unexpected especially given that the bus driver uses his nearside indicator to signal he is pulling into the kerb or turning left. The cyclist did not show a sufficiently high standard of observation and anticipation therefore falling below the standard of a reasonably careful and prudent cyclist. We have one of those adjacent to him filming the whole thing!

People are prejudging here that cycle lanes are crap or impractical to give the bus driver the benefit of the doubt. I quite agree the lane is crap but there is no excusing the driver being in the cycle lane.

No......not at all. The whole point of this footage and posting it here is to warn inexperienced or idiot cyclists not to do as this cyclist has done as the likelihood of serious or fatal injury is extremely high. The thread has nothing to do with judging cycle lanes. The fact that you believe there is no excuse for the driver positioning their bus in the cycle lane shows you have totally missed the message of this thread and the danger to cyclists. The bus driver appears to be in the cycle lane either partially or fully. You don't need to be an Einstein to work out that to try to force your way up the near side of a slow moving double decker bus possibly coming to a stop next to the kerb is very dangerous and likely to result in your injury or death.

You're also talking about behaviour.

No you are.

There's no question the cyclist should have held back.

Hooray we are getting somewhere.

In the cold light of day in the event of the collision and the cyclist getting killed the bus driver would have to answer why they were in the cycle lane.

Many collisions occur in low light conditions. Killing suggests murder. Fatally injured I think you mean.
Yes in the event of a collision where a cyclist were injured I'm sure the bus driver would have to give an account of what they did, their observations, road positioning, etc....

If I were an insurer or a copper

You're not then? We have a few resident coppers who could contribute here and no doubt a few insurance accident investigators.

I would give some of the blame to the bus driver.

So you are judge and jury now?
But seemingly harsh given the bus driver was significantly in front of the cyclist and that a reasonable and prudent cyclist was following and filmed the whole thing. I don't think your opinion that the bus driver would be "to blame" would carry much weight. In this instance the cyclist's standard of riding fell well below that of a reasonable and prudent cyclist. His anticipation, observation and control of his bicycle was very poor nearly colliding with the rear of the bus. Anyway the law does not concern itself with 'blame'. It is merely concerned with guilt in criminal law and liability in civil law.

There are however some things in the bus driver's favour, they did indicate.

That's charitable of you.

A much better example of a video of this behaviour would be the same playout but without the cycle lane.

No.............. better example of what! The film footage is as it shows. You can't just change the scene or re-enact it to suit an alternative argument you want to put forward. If a cyclist has been injured you would be trying to establish what happened not what didn’t.

Do you not recognise that this footage shows how dangerous cycling up the inside of a long and heavy vehicle such as a bus or lorry that is close to the kerb, moving toward a kerb or turning at a juntion generally a left turn junction can be? To not put yourself in a postion where a long vehicle could crush you when manoevring or turning, do you? Do you really appreciate the risks for cyclists in doing this, the necessity to inform all cyclists not to do it so no one else suffers injury or dies from their injuries for not knowing? Do you.....?

Most cyclists know that they are certainly not going to come off well if in collision with a large vehicle so treat them with more respect when manoevring around them. They recognise that drivers of these vehicles may have reduced visibility, blind spots and that failure to avoid these to give them enough space can result in serious injury to themselves or death. Some cyclists as indicated by this footage clearly don't seem to appreciate this and the need to take extreme care.

 

[marinyork]

So........your point?

Your very aggressive manner and seizing on particular issues could be taken the wrong way. Some people could interpret what you've written coupled with being new as you not being a cyclist at all and trolling.

Presuming there are no other cyclists on his nearside the bus driver has as you have suggested positioned his bus so it is partially in the cycle lane. If it was clear to do so when he did this he has done nothing wrong. Buses and all other motorised vehicles can use cycle lanes on the road that have broken edged lines and bikes can share use with bus lanes.

You are factually wrong. You're still not supposed to use motorised vehicles in cycle lanes unless it is unavoidable. The issue is not only that cyclist but the poor positioning of the bus prevents other cyclists from using the ASL. One can argue partial bus driver culpability from several different angles.

(1) It's a cycle lane. They shouldn't be there.
(2) They shouldn't change lanes unless it's safe. Vehicles coming along voids this. Especially true the closer you get to the junction.
(3) In a collision straddling lanes or effectively filtering by double using a lane is generally regarded as being that vehicle's fault. The bus is double using the cycle lane.

In any other circumstance if we stripped out the cyclist and replaced them by another vehicle and replaced the cycle lane by an alternative sort of lane the judgement would be a 50:50. One vehicle should wait but what on earth was the other doing changing lane/straddling a lane. That's how it is here. If there was no cycle lane then things would be very different.

 

[Crankarm]

Your very aggressive manner and seizing on particular issues could be taken the wrong way. Some people could interpret what you've written coupled with being new as you not being a cyclist at all and trolling.

You are factually wrong.

I don't think so .

You're still not supposed to use motorised vehicles in cycle lanes unless it is unavoidable.

Like when the bus is approaching a bus stop or turning left?

The issue is not only that cyclist but the poor positioning of the bus prevents other cyclists from using the ASL. One can argue partial bus driver culpability from several different angles.

(1) It's a cycle lane. They shouldn't be there.
(2) They shouldn't change lanes unless it's safe. Vehicles coming along voids this. Especially true the closer you get to the junction.
(3) In a collision straddling lanes or effectively filtering by double using a lane is generally regarded as being that vehicle's fault. The bus is double using the cycle lane.

In any other circumstance if we stripped out the cyclist and replaced them by another vehicle and replaced the cycle lane by an alternative sort of lane the judgement would be a 50:50. One vehicle should wait but what on earth was the other doing changing lane/straddling a lane. That's how it is here. If there was no cycle lane then things would be very different.

Unbelievable Marinyork, absolutely unbelievable....... Perhaps you should watch the clip again.


You're obviously one of those cyclists for whom this thread is aimed.
May I suggest some of the Highway Code.

I've done my bit for this thread. I don't feel the need to add any more.

It was a pleasure posting with you. BTW thanks for your warm welcome

 

[4F]

My opinion here is that the road is clearly not wide enough for a cycle lane so you can hardly blame the bus for the position it finds itself in. A classic example of a local authority getting slap happy with some paint thinking they are assisting cyclists when the opposite is true. Plus the cyclist is a fool as it is clear to anyone with half a brain that the bus is going to turn left due to the indicators.

 

[ferret fur]

Normally I'd defend the cyclist's point of view, but this time he simply is an idiot. I don't understand where you expect the bus driver to go. His lane is simply too narrow. He is turning left. If he left the cycle lane free he would be obstructing the oustide lane. He either goes into the cycle lane (with a broken line), or he straddles two width car lanes. Either way he is occupying two lanes and he has elected to part occupy the lane to his left. The only problem is the cyclists stupid behaviour & even if you reckon the bus driver could have avoided being in the cycle lane it still doesn't excuse such recklessness

 

[4F]

ASL guidance advises that they should have an entry point, and that if this point leads from a cycle lane then the lane should be as long as the normal queue length at the junction.

So as per my previous post the road is clearly not suitable for an ASL and feeder lane.

 

[Crankarm]

Marinyork, I was a bit full on, but for the right reasons - being safe on the road is so important. The time between cycling upright and then suddenly being down and flattened can be a fraction of a second and lives can be ruined or lost. I hope you can now see the logic and appreciate the risks this clip shows. No hard feelings. Safe riding.
Crankarm

Ps. Thanks to OP Magnatom for posting this. Better to learn by others' mistakes than your own in this instance.

 

[Arch]

Maybe he deliberately blocked the cycle lane in order to prevent a cyclist from riding down the side of the bus and getting squished as he turned left. If anything he needed to be further to the left.

Yeah, a sort of 'anti-primary' position....

What a jerk (the cyclist). I notice however that he will be fine, because he's wearing hi-vis and a helmet. All the gear, and no idea, I think the phrase is...

Maybe ALL long vehicles should carry one of those 'don't pass down this side' stickers, perhaps with "Read Cyclecraft!" underneath. But then there are still going to be the few that don't get it until they see someone flattened over a railing, and even then, some won't make the connection. We've all seen crash test dummy footage on telly, and yet people still take a chance on driving without a seatbelt because 'it won't happen to them'....

BTW, I was wondering the other day, how much difference would be made if trucks all had solid skirts down the side, instead of just those bars designed to stop cars going under. I know it makes no difference if there's a railing, but in cases where there isn't, would it stop cyclists being 'sucked' under the wheels?

 

[Origamist]

BTW, I was wondering the other day, how much difference would be made if trucks all had solid skirts down the side, instead of just those bars designed to stop cars going under. I know it makes no difference if there's a railing, but in cases where there isn't, would it stop cyclists being 'sucked' under the wheels?

There is a lot of info here about HGV skirting, safety implications and exemptions (and many other interesting things):

Strategies for enhanced pedestrian and cyclist friendly design​

http://www.aprosys.com/Documents/deliverables/D212AB_updated.pdf