Another cyclist dies in London

[Moonhawk]

budgie smuggler said:

No you seem to be missing the point.

A cycle lane should appear where needed to direct cars and traffic away from cyclists where they need to. Pretty much the exact opposite of what we currently have.

But of the type of cycle lane on that bridge - you stated that "largely there is no benefit to them whatsoever."

You appear to be advocating completely separate cycle paths (off the main carriageway) - and I can see the benefit of those - however would there be enough room for that type to be constructed. Also - where those types are constructed - they tend to have give-way markings or controlled cycle crossings when they cross a main carriageway as it would have to do.

Given you have already suggested that some cyclists may wish to actively avoid stopping at these give-ways and ride on the main carriageway instead - how much benefit would actually be realised?

[saaby93]

When designing these layouts, you have to assume the cyclist isnt a driver and so doesnt necessarily think like a driver and doesnt think like a road planner
If you look how that so-called cycle lane ends it gives no indication at all that traffic is going to be pushed left at the pinch point and that cycles should merge into traffic in turn
Anyone who doesnt know whats going on is surely going to continue as if there is a cycle lane where the lane markings have been replaced with zebra crossing markings
0/10 for layout

[budgie smuggler]

Moonhawk said:

But of the type of cycle lane on that bridge - you stated that "largely there is no benefit to them whatsoever."

You appear to be advocating completely separate cycle paths (off the main carriageway) - and I can see the benefit of those - however would there be enough room for that type to be constructed. Also - where those types are constructed - they tend to have give-way markings or controlled cycle crossings when they cross a main carriageway as it would have to do.

Given you have already suggested that some cyclists may wish to actively avoid stopping at these give-ways and ride on the main carriageway instead - how much benefit would actually be realised?

It requires thought, I certainly don't have all the answers. What I do think is that the current stuff we have doesn't really help anybody. In a lot of places it is clearly just a box ticking exercise.

I think though that there would be benefits for motorists and cyclist if the infrastructure was properly designed and implemented.

I also think cycling proficiency ('bikeability') should be more strongly encouraged.

WRT separated bike paths, yes I advocate them where there is space and where they are implemented and maintained properly. Nobody wants to use a path covered with broken car mirrors where you have to stop every 50 meters to give way to a path therefore making it a waste of money.

[saaby93]

Somebody get a can of white paint

[budgie smuggler]

saaby93 said:

Somebody get a can of white paint

Ah, you mean

[saaby93]

saaby93 said:

Somebody get a can of white paint

budgie smuggler said:

Ah, you mean

Either or a mixture of both would do
But probably work best to look over right shoulder and give priority to right?

Edited by saaby93 on Tuesday 28th February 11:37

[popeyewhite]

saaby93 said:

Somebody get a can of white paint

You'd think it common sense that when your lane ends and you enter another lane you'd give way if there are vehicles already on it. In fact I think the HC mentions this somewhere.

Edited by popeyewhite on Tuesday 28th February 11:41

[IroningMan]

saaby93 said:

When designing these layouts, you have to assume the cyclist isnt a driver and so doesnt necessarily think like a driver and doesnt think like a road planner
If you look how that so-called cycle lane ends it gives no indication at all that traffic is going to be pushed left at the pinch point and that cycles should merge into traffic in turn
Anyone who doesnt know whats going on is surely going to continue as if there is a cycle lane where the lane markings have been replaced with zebra crossing markings
0/10 for layout

That's rubbish. Who has priority when the division between lanes ends?

[SystemParanoia]

saaby93 said:

saaby93 said:

Somebody get a can of white paint

budgie smuggler said:

Ah, you mean

Either or a mixture of both would do

Almost...

[saaby93]

SystemParanoia said:

saaby93 said:

saaby93 said:

Somebody get a can of white paint

budgie smuggler said:

Ah, you mean

Either or a mixture of both would do

Almost...

Thinking about it, the last 2 would still have truck/buses squashing cyclists in their blind spot, so on balance would go for the top one,
but dont all three work better than present?

Edited by saaby93 on Tuesday 28th February 11:42

[FrankAbagnale]

An even simpler solution -

[anonymous-user]

Sorry for being a bit slow here,

Did she cycle up the inside of the wagon and he then moved across because he wasn't aware she was there?

Or did he pull alongside her and then close the gap forgetting she was there?

There are lots of those types of junctions in my town and they mostly work, but I suppose London traffic is on a different scale and every fecker seems to think they are more important than the next person.

[saaby93]

Insert Coin said:

Sorry for being a bit slow here,

Did she cycle up the inside of the wagon and he then moved across because he wasn't aware she was there?

Or did he pull alongside her and then close the gap forgetting she was there?

There are lots of those types of junctions in my town and they mostly work, but I suppose London traffic is on a different scale and every fecker seems to think they are more important than the next person.

According to the reports she went under the left front wheel and had been seen squeezing up the inside by another cyclist that knew the layout and held back ( said he'd seen the same nearly happen the week before) , so may have been in that front left blind spot. He checked his mirrors had been on a cyclist awareness course couple weeks before but didnt know she was there

[blugnu]

saaby93 said:

According to the reports she went under the left front wheel and had been seen squeezed up the inside so may have been in that front left blind spot. He checked his mirrors had been on a cyclist awareness course couple weeks before but didnt know she was there

What does the fact that he'd been on a cyclist awareness course tell us? I know plenty of people who sat in maths lessons for 11 years and can't do simple arithmetic, and one who now lectures at University in maths concepts I can't begin to comprehend.

The fact that he had been on the course (which I understand was a legal requirement) is neither here nor there.

[saaby93]

blugnu said:

What does the fact that he'd been on a cyclist awareness course tell us? I know plenty of people who sat in maths lessons for 11 years and can't do simple arithmetic, and one who now lectures at University in maths concepts I can't begin to comprehend.

The fact that he had been on the course (which I understand was a legal requirement) is neither here nor there.

It shows that even if youve been on the course (so are hopefully slightly more aware) and have the mirrors you cant defy physics and gain psychic powers

[Moonhawk]

IroningMan said:

That's rubbish. Who has priority when the division between lanes ends?

As the cycle lane markings end - i'd say you are technically leaving a cycle lane and so rule 63 would apply.

[anonymous-user]

Moonhawk said:

Hugo a Gogo said:

so she passed it, or was passing it? because she ended up run over by the front wheel

Which IMO was a risky move - one that the cyclist behind clearly recognised.

I would be wary about making such a move in a car - especially if the lorry's intentions were unclear.

A little more from a recreated piece in the print version of the Scottish Daily Mail,

"...Mr Healey said he had deliberately hung back to avoid cycling alongside the truck. He told the Court he thought Miss Gemmill was in a "blind spot" and was riding her bike in an "absent-minded way".

Another witness said he thought Miss Gemmill lost her balance as the truck went past and fell under the wheels.

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/scottish-daily-mail...

[anonymous-user]

saaby93 said:

According to the reports she went under the left front wheel and had been seen squeezing up the inside by another cyclist that knew the layout and held back ( said he'd seen the same nearly happen the week before) , so may have been in that front left blind spot. He checked his mirrors had been on a cyclist awareness course couple weeks before but didnt know she was there

You're asking for trouble by squeezing up the inside of any vehicle, especially a gravel wagon.

Especially if the option of turning left at that roundabout was there?

I cycle a fair bit, but I'd never go up the inside of anything, I do a shoulder check and get behind the vehicle in front.

I suppose there's a fair amount of peer pressure from other more aggressive riders in London, she's probably aware other riders are behind but doesn't want to slam the anchors on for fear of getting grief from them as they get bunched up behind.

I suppose it's time that companies were forced to purchase more cycle and pedestrian friendly vehicles?

http://lcc.org.uk/articles/progress-towards-safer-...

[Hugo a Gogo]

djstevec said:

Another witness said he thought Miss Gemmill lost her balance as the truck went past and fell under the wheels.

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/scottish-daily-mail...

that was unlucky

she just fell off just as the truck was right behind her

[yellowjack]

cb1965 said:

Moonhawk said:

It ends because there isn't enough room at the roundabout to accommodate the road lane and the cycle lane....seems like a pretty good reason to me.

Also - because it was the cycle lane that ended, the cyclist had to rejoin the main traffic lane - the onus is on the cyclists to ensure it is safe and that other road users are aware of their intention to do so as per HC rule 63:

"When leaving a cycle lane check before pulling out that it is safe to do so and signal your intention clearly to other road users."

I would treat the end of a cycle lane like the end of a normal traffic lane and merge with the traffic - I certainly wouldn't put myself alongside a large vehicle like a lorry. The cyclist behind the woman in this case clearly thought the same.

IMO - education is a big part of this. Cyclists (and pedestrians) are free to use the road without ever having had any formal training. Many won't even have picked up a copy of the highway code (which is crazy - considering it's free to view online). Whilst it wont prevent every incident (like it doesn't for vehicle drivers) - it may help to raise the general level of awareness.

IMO the HC should be taught at school. Schools teach the dangers of drugs, strangers etc, yet for kids aged 5-19, the biggest killer is road/transport accidents - but there is no mandatory education on how to use the roads safely either as a pedestrian or cyclist. Bonkers!

This ^^^^ 100% nail hit on head!

And while there are twunts like this idiot...

cb1965 said:

I read and send texts all the time while driving and will continue to do so. Hope that cheers everyone up

from... http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

...out there still holding driving licences, cyclists really do need "eyes in the back of their heads"...