RLJ or no RLJ ???

[Arch]

Indicate just before the light turns amber... then you don't have to start cycling one handed.

+1 I learned from my driving instructor to watch the other sets of lights to get advance warning of mine changing, and I do it all the time. As soon as I see the other set go amber I indicate, I put my hands back on the bars when mine go red/amber, and I'm away on the green. (it's easiest in the dark as you an see light cast even of you can't see the actual lens. Green/red men, if present, also give clues. Get to know the phase, and the clues to look for).

And you chose to go clipless. I never have trouble with clipping in myself, not being clipless. I use toeclips, and I pedal with the other side of the pedal until I'm moving well enough to flip it round.

You say traffic coming at you - do you mean the traffic oncoming and turning right goes at the same time as you turn left? As GrasB says, they should be giving way to you. What you could do, which is legally grey but better than jumping the light, is not indicate left. This makes oncoming traffic assume you're coming on, and also helps to prevent someone behind overtaking and left hooking you. I think a few people on here recommend it.

 

[jig-sore]

Predictability. That's why we obey the road laws even in situations where we don't see any immediate need to. Every road user has to make some assumptions about what others will do, and the more predictable we can make the roads the safer we all are.

There's a lot of complaints about drivers, but most of them are pretty good and we rely a hell of a lot on them sticking to the rules. If it ever becomes a real free-for-all out there cyclists will suffer the worst.

More than anyone we have a vested interest in good road discipline and we shouldn't forget that.

aha, i think you may have hit the nail on the head

i really just wanted to post this one just to get the subject discussed, and to help people see where these temptations crop up.

please fell free to carry on the discussion

 

[summerdays]

I wouldn't bother indicating probably - but I would be in primary position either in an ASL or in line. If it was a junction where drivers frequently turned right at the same time as me I definitely wouldn't indicate. After all who gains from you indicating ... the only person really is the person behind but they have to wait behind you anyway if you are in primary position. But what you need there is:

http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8&h...0193,-2.540127&spn=0.000324,0.000728&t=h&z=21

That's a cycle lane I use occasionally to skip the red light - but it depends on there not being a big queue of cars in the first place.

 

[Arch]

but even if this is so, then at the point when the traffic is moving then that would indicate that the peds should not be.

IF the junction was set up with a left filter for one set of road users, then any ped crossing would be phased appropriately. But as it stands, you'd be jumping a red, and therefore clashing with any ped crossing phase.

Also, even if there isn't a crossing, peds may use the junction, and use the lights as a clue as to when it's best to go. Yes, they should still be looking as they cross, but they should be able to assume that a red means stop and no traffic from that direction.

We have a spot here in York where traffic has to alternate through a narrow point in the city walls, but there's a continuous green light for cycles, which can go through an arch in the wall. It still leads to a light controlled crossroads, so you have to stop a few yards further on, but you get an advantage. It shows that separate lights for cycles do exist, and can work. Until you have one though, you have to wait.

If you're really that impatient, get off, push round the corner and get back on. Personally, I like the chance to catch my breath, sit upright, look round and feel superior to drivers...

 

[jig-sore]

You say traffic coming at you - do you mean the traffic oncoming and turning right goes at the same time as you turn left? As GrasB says, they should be giving way to you. What you could do, which is legally grey but better than jumping the light, is not indicate left. This makes oncoming traffic assume you're coming on, and also helps to prevent someone behind overtaking and left hooking you. I think a few people on here recommend it.

aha, yes, another good point.

yes, if there is no traffic in my lane, the oncoming traffic would have the chance to go immediately and cut across me if i was going straight on !!!
and i think i have it bad turning left !!!

there is a small cycle lane and ASL on the road, my edit has blocked that, i'll post an un molested pic.
i wonder how many people would be brave enough to get in the ASL if going straight on???

the more you look at it, the worst this junction gets for the cyclist

 

[Arch]

That's a cycle lane I use occasionally to skip the red light - but it depends on there not being a big queue of cars in the first place.

I have one of those, hops you up onto the pavement, past the red light at the T-junction entrance to Morrisons, back onto the road. The only thing wrong with it is that it's two-way and for some reason it's been painted with arrows indicating that cyclists should past to the left of each other, instead of the right light the road. But as I've never seen a cyclist coming the other way (and where would they go, as the lane would then dierct them into the road on the wrong side), it's not a problem....

 

[Arch]

i wonder how many people would be brave enough to get in the ASL if going straight on???

Well, without actually trying it I can't be sure, but if that was what I needed to do, that's what I'd do.

I don't see the problem, really. It's a T junction, where you cross the T. There are millions of them across the country. You ride assertively and defensively and assume everyone else is a blind blithering idiot, so you cover your brakes.

If there were no lights at all, would you worry about riding straight on? You're just as likely to have someone turn right across you in that situation.

 

[Arch]

I've ben trying to think of a similar junction I use, and yes, there is one (with me going straight on), and I have no worries about it from that score. I watch the traffic turning right very carefully, and eyeball the drivers, and I've never had a problem of someone turning across me. If I was turning left, I'd just do the same.

 

[jig-sore]

OK, here's the junction without my doodles, showing short cycle lane and ASL (complete with half a car). the red arrow shows the direction of the hill going upwards, putting the ASL at the bottom of the hill...

i guess the ASL should give you a clear position from which to indicate and get your hands back on the bars before you move off, as suggested. but then your relying on the drivers actually paying attention.


MMM, maybe rugby station ain't so bad after all

 

[jig-sore]

Well, without actually trying it I can't be sure, but if that was what I needed to do, that's what I'd do.

I don't see the problem, really. It's a T junction, where you cross the T. There are millions of them across the country. You ride assertively and defensively and assume everyone else is a blind blithering idiot, so you cover your brakes.

If there were no lights at all, would you worry about riding straight on? You're just as likely to have someone turn right across you in that situation.

true, but we know how impatient drivers can be and many of them will see the lights as the perfect chance to get ahead of the slow cyclist who has to start off up hill making it very likely that you will get cut up

 

[GrasB]

jig-sore, if you're having problems then you're not being assertive enough with road position & defensive with the management of your road space. I know how impatient motorists can be but if you're managing your road space properly besides deliberately running you over the worst they can do is get a bit vocal & that's an extremely small minority.

 

[jimboalee]

If the lights turn red as you approach them, jump off the bike and walk it round the friggin pavement and rejoin your intented route beyond the ped Xing.

There's no law against a cyclist walking their bike on the pavement, just some stupid idea that because the cyclist has a bike with them, they should wait at a red light.

 

[Arch]

true, but we know how impatient drivers can be and many of them will see the lights as the perfect chance to get ahead of the slow cyclist who has to start off up hill making it very likely that you will get cut up

Ok, so you expect it. That's your secret weapon over many drivers - a brain! There are numerous places where I expect a car to squeeze by me, and I cycle accordingly - sometimes, if I'm feeling fit and fast, that might mean holding my lane, sometimes when I feel more sluggish, it's just giving myself room to manoeuvre if someone does cut in or whatever...

There's always the option to sit and wait back in the line of traffic, if that gives you better protection. I just don't see that junction as much different to the junctions I use day in, day out, without recourse to jumping lights...

 

[brokenbetty]

There's no law against a cyclist walking their bike on the pavement, just some stupid idea that because the cyclist has a bike with them, they should wait at a red light.

Really? You'll have to point me towards some examples of this stupid idea. I've never seen anyone suggest a cyclist should wait at a light rather than walk their bike on the pavement if that's what they want to do.

I've seen lots of people assert that a cyclist should wait at a light rather than jump it or ride on the pavement, but that's completely different, isn't it?

 

[hackbike 666]

I don't think I have ever wheeled my bike through traffic lights just because I can't be patient and wait for a change.