Suicidal Cyclist

Retrogamer

I never use those advanced stop boxes. If i get to the front of traffic at the lights it'll be seconds before they're all queing up waiting to get past me again.

I don't pass vehicles waiting in the queue for the same reason.

Just take primary position and wait in line with the other cars then move to the left once traffic starts to move.

brat

Retrogamer wrote: »

I never use those advanced stop boxes. If i get to the front of traffic at the lights it'll be seconds before they're all queing up waiting to get past me again.

I don't pass vehicles waiting in the queue for the same reason.

Just take primary position and wait in line with the other cars then move to the left once traffic starts to move.

I don't do prescriptive. I'm very familiar with all of the traffic lights in our area that have ASL zones, and if I can use them with no added risk I will. That often depends on where I'm going (left, right, ahead), the size of the queue, the width of the road, the number of peds crossing through the traffic queue, the presence of an extended cycle lane, my place in the queue, what vehicle is at the head of the queue, am I going to get to the ASL before the lights change etc etc.

I have had a few near misses from HGVs and buses whose drivers have overtaken me on the approach to traffic lights then decided to turn left while I am still on their nearside. I tend to prefer to either get out of their way by moving up into the ASL, or if I can't, I'll completely boss my lane until I'm through the lights. But my decisions depend on too many variables to allow me to be too prescriptive.

Retrogamer

I'm enjoying more of these threads. Learning quite a lot from them.

Most of my experience with cycling is on off road or cycle tracks. I'm a very confident cyclist but my road experience is lacking.

I won't put myself in any danger knowingly but it might happen due to my ignorance. The experiences shared here are reducing that quite a bit.

Paradigm

Johno100 wrote: »

You mean the Advanced Stop Line/Zone? Which are just the same shape as a wagons blind spot, really clever idea.

I can't believe any driver wouldn't see those two bikes with riders on, especially the one in front.

The tallest truck I've driven is a DAF XF & I can quite easily see a cyclist in front of me at a ASL but then I make a special point of looking

I'm not a cyclist so it's interesting to read opinions from those who are.

Edited to add: On the subject of blind spots, with correctly set mirrors there are very few.

fred246

I am never quite sure about ASL. They seem to encourage nutty drivers to do dangerous overtaking manoevres to get past after the lights have gone green. Then you come to the next one. You then cycle past the same nutty driver and go to the front again. I am very conscious that the nutty driver that has spent a fortune on his car wants to be faster than the cyclist on his bike. I often watch cyclists go through on red and disappear safely into the distance while I wait with a line of nutty motorists behind me hell bent on crazy overtaking when the lights turn green.

almillar

retrogamer:

I sometimes have to commute along roads to reach my off road cycling locations.
Might look a bit unusual and be a bit more sweaty cycling around forests with my high viz jacket on

You're making yourself less visible for the sake of a bit of sweat? Don't you think that you should be as visible as possible, on the road AND in the forest? Bright/reflective clothing at least?
As I car driver I'm paranoid about not being seen, so I usually have my dipped beam on. It appalls me seeing so many car drivers with sidelights, no lights, DRLs or bulbs not working in this poor visibility weather (hint - DRLs can't be seen from behind!), so it really confuses me when cyclists take the attitude that it's other road user's responsibility solely to see them. That attitude will end up with you on a hospital bed or worse.
I've just decribed 1 tonne+ monsters driving around that are difficult to see - you should be making yourself as visible as possible at all times of the year when on the road, no matter what vehicle you're in.

Retrogamer

almillar wrote: »

retrogamer:
You're making yourself less visible for the sake of a bit of sweat?

Even if i was cycling naked, i'd still be too hot on some of the ascends i have to do in the summer, so yes. Pretty much.

almillar wrote: »

Don't you think that you should be as visible as possible, on the road AND in the forest? Bright/reflective clothing at least?

Yes, where practical.

almillar wrote: »

so it really confuses me when cyclists take the attitude that it's other road user's responsibility solely to see them.

That's because most fo the time it is.

I think i go well above the minimum standards to be seen when visibility is reduced or it's dark but if it's bright and / or sunny then I'll be on a black bike most of the time, with no reflectors and wearing dark clothes.

almillar wrote: »

I've just decribed 1 tonne+ monsters driving around that are difficult to see - you should be making yourself as visible as possible at all times of the year when on the road, no matter what vehicle you're in.

I take measures to make sure i'm visible when visibility is reduced, (both in the car and on my bicycles) but if someone struggles to see me cycling on a bright day in regular clothes they probably shouldn't be driving.

Tobster86

As a cyclist with a 25-mile round commute and an enthusiastic driver, it's quite funny to respond to the 'pay some road tax' argument with the fact that my car is a 5-series with a 4.4l V8.

brat

almillar wrote: »

retrogamer:

You're making yourself less visible for the sake of a bit of sweat? Don't you think that you should be as visible as possible, on the road AND in the forest? Bright/reflective clothing at least?
As I car driver I'm paranoid about not being seen, so I usually have my dipped beam on. It appalls me seeing so many car drivers with sidelights, no lights, DRLs or bulbs not working in this poor visibility weather (hint - DRLs can't be seen from behind!), so it really confuses me when cyclists take the attitude that it's other road user's responsibility solely to see them. That attitude will end up with you on a hospital bed or worse.
I've just decribed 1 tonne+ monsters driving around that are difficult to see - you should be making yourself as visible as possible at all times of the year when on the road, no matter what vehicle you're in.

I see a couple of issues with a drive for road users to become more and more highly visible.

The first is that it automatically renders other road users relatively less visible. When we drive, the motoring para-conscious mind normally relaxes to 'reasonable expectation', and if it is our expectation that every cyclist has or should have lights and fluorescence, then we are more likely to miss those who don't.

Secondly, motorists drive within parameters of risk that is acceptable to them, usually an exceedingly low risk. But if the risk associated with a particular hazard is perceived to diminish, such as an improved junction layout or better road surface or more visible cyclists/motorists, the driver will subconsciously increase speed or divert concentration from driving to rebalance the risk (the concept of risk homeostasis). This means that those who choose not to join the bandwagon towards super-illumination are placed at ever increasing risk.

Thirdly, the more cyclists that are forced through fear or more likely propaganda to dress themselves in top to toe yellow fluorescent apparel, the more likely a magistrate would be prepared to accept such impoverished mitigation as "sorry mate, I didn't see you."

Altarf

wheelz wrote: »

car drivers should look better and respect vulnerable road users.

That may be true, but saying it doesn't create a forcefield that prevents you getting killed.

Some lights and hi-viz might.