We need cyclist education

Capt'n Midnight

Stark wrote:

On a side note, I notice Labour promised to make cycling a priority issue today (http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/?jp=MHAUQLMHKFGB&rss=rss1). If they actually do plan on providing safe cycle routes through the city, they have my vote

Let's not forget the Green Party too

snickerpuss

I was thinking about this thread when i read this report:

Women cyclists ‘risk death’ by obeying traffic lights

Women cyclists are far more likely to be killed by a lorry because, unlike men, they tend to obey red lights and wait at junctions in the driver’s blind spot, according to a study.

The report by Transport for London’s road safety unit was completed last July but has been kept secret. It suggests that some cyclists who break the law by jumping red lights may be safer and that cycle feeder lanes may make the problem worse.

The Times has obtained a copy of the study, which says that 86 per cent of the women cyclists killed in London between 1999 and 2004 collided with a lorry. By contrast, lorries were involved in 47 per cent of deaths of male cyclists.

The findings help to explain why the growing popularity of cycling by city commuters is resulting in frequent deaths of young women in similar circumstances. The death rate among women cyclists has increased since the report was completed, with two killed in collisions with lorries within 24 hours last month.

Amelia Zollner, 24, a Cambridge-educated scientist working at the Institute for Public Policy Research, was cycling to work in central London and had stopped at traffic lights in Russell Square next to a lorry. She was killed when the lorry pulled away after the lights changed.

Rosie Wright, 26, worked close by at the School of Oriental and African Studies, and spoke with friends about her distress on learning that a young woman had died. The next day she was killed by a lorry accelerating away from traffic lights.

The study states: “Women may be overrepresented in [collisions with goods vehicles] because they are less likely than men to disobey red lights.”

By jumping red lights, men are less likely to be caught in a lorry driver’s blind spot. Cyclists may wait at the lights just in front of a lorry, not realising that they are difficult to see.

In more than half the fatal crashes, the lorry was turning left. Cyclists may be deceived by a lorry swinging out to the right to give itself room to make a left turn.

The study states that cycle “feeder” lanes, which allow cyclists to overtake vehicles along the nearside kerb to get to the front of queues, may “exacerbate the problem”.

It also says that pedestrian guard railings may have contributed to three of the deaths because cyclists became trapped between the railings and the lorry, leaving them no escape route.

Peter Wright, the father of Rosie and a vehicle safety expert who heads the commission which regulates safety in international motorsport, criticised TfL for failing to publish the study. “Rosie was reasonably cautious, which seems to be the problem. It seems that you need to be aggressive and assertive to survive as a cyclist,” he said. “TfL’s attitude is unacceptable.

“It should stop withholding the study because we need an open public debate about the findings to seek ways of preventing more deaths. There is something wrong if the only way you can survive on a bike is to skip the lights.”

Adam Coffman, an official at the Cyclists’ Touring Club, said: “Women cyclists tend to ride more slowly and are less comfortable doing things that feel risky.

So, instead of positioning themselves out wide in the road where they can more easily see and be seen, they are more inclined to hug the kerb, a way of cycling that may feel safer but is in fact more risky.”

A TfL spokesman said the study had not been published because it was “produced solely to inform TfL policies”. He said that there was no direct evidence that women were more at risk because they obeyed red lights.

TfL last month mounted a poster campaign to inform lorry drivers and cyclists of the dangers of collisions at junctions.

What say ye?

cyclopath2001

snickerpuss wrote:

What say ye?

Taking a safe position on the road and making sure you're visible are key. But I'd also say that stronger, more experienced cyclists are more likely to be able to extricate themselves from a dangerous situations caused by wind, slipstream and dangerous overtaking by truck drivers. Experience too, will guide cyclists into avoiding dangerous scenarios. Male cyclists tend to be more experienced.

I've always deplored the ROTR advice to 'keep as close to the left as possible'. I think this exposes cyclists to doors, cars coming out of junctions and errant pedestrians. Hugging the kerb makes cyclists practically invisible to merging cars whose drivers are usually looking into the centre of the road.

daymobrew

Cyclists may wait at the lights just in front of a lorry, not realising that they are difficult to see.

In more than half the fatal crashes, the lorry was turning left. Cyclists may be deceived by a lorry swinging out to the right to give itself room to make a left turn.

The study states that cycle “feeder” lanes, which allow cyclists to overtake vehicles along the nearside kerb to get to the front of queues, may “exacerbate the problem”.

Because of experience, I know not to make the mistakes listed here. Which brings me back to my suggestion of cyclist education

Raam

cyclopath2001 wrote:

I've always deplored the ROTR advice to 'keep as close to the left as possible'. I think this exposes cyclists to doors, cars coming out of junctions and errant pedestrians. Hugging the kerb makes cyclists practically invisible to merging cars whose drivers are usually looking into the centre of the road.

Same here.
In my opinion "as close to the left as possible" is about 3 to 6 feet away from either the kerb or a parked car, whichever is closest to me. I've been beeped by drivers for being "in the middle of the road" when in fact I was in the middle of the lane because most of the left half of the lane was filled with a string of parked cars. If I'm doing 30kmph, I don't want to have to suddenly swerve to dodge a car door, so I'll stay well clear of them. It's much safer for me and for motorists because I won't have to suddenly swerve into their path. When I explained to one fella, that I don't want to be taken out by a car door, he never responded. He just drove off. He was also texting on his phone at the time, but I never thought to point it out to him. Ah well

DirkVoodoo

cyclopath2001 wrote:

Taking a safe position on the road and making sure you're visible are key. But I'd also say that stronger, more experienced cyclists are more likely to be able to extricate themselves from a dangerous situations caused by wind, slipstream and dangerous overtaking by truck drivers. Experience too, will guide cyclists into avoiding dangerous scenarios. Male cyclists tend to be more experienced.

I've always deplored the ROTR advice to 'keep as close to the left as possible'. I think this exposes cyclists to doors, cars coming out of junctions and errant pedestrians. Hugging the kerb makes cyclists practically invisible to merging cars whose drivers are usually looking into the centre of the road.

Exactly. I find that by keeping a good distance between yourself and the kerb, cars will not try and squeeze past you with oncoming traffic, instead waiting for a gap to properly overtake, much like they would any other obstacle. Out of necessity for the most part, the road where I live has been destroyed by constant building, heavy vehicles parked on roadsides, etc. so the area close to the kerb not only contains the usual drains, but some large and dangerous potholes which have to be avoided.

I tend to push out past the red light when waiting in traffic. Granted Im not driving in town, but at most junctions I try and sit well ahead of the traffic behind me to make sure they can see me. Tragic to know that so many of these accidents can be avoided by more driver and cyclist awareness over things like drink-driving and speeding.

Civilian_Target

Interesting what they say about guard railings at junctions - they're much more prevalent in England than in Ireland and they do leave you absolutely nowhere to go if things go wrong. On one occasion I've actually gone headlong into them to avoid a car that pulled out without looking! I think they're quite hazardous to cyclists and I notice any rececntly redeveloped street never has them.

As an experienced cyclists, I make few of mistakes listed above - I do cycle out a bit and I never stop or slow near heavy vehicles - I either stay well clear or make sure I have clearance to pass. It's the kind of not-necessarily-intuitive thing that cyclists ought to know....

Civilian_Target

Also - good point by cyclopath - I've never really thought of it much but you're right, a full left position leaves you very exposed to motorists joining your road....

tampopo

Civilian_Target wrote:

think they're quite hazardous to cyclists and I notice any rececntly redeveloped street never has them.

QUOTE]

Every recently redeveloped junction on Cork Street in Dublin has those railings. Dolphin's Barn Junction has been redeveloped in the last two years or so and is covered in them.

Cornmarket in the city centre near Christchurch was done about 10 years ago and is covered in them.

the junction at Crumlin Rd,Herberton Rd and Sundrive Rd has been redeveloped twice in the last five years and has those railings.

Off Rant! The S C Rd outside the Shell garage in Kilmainham road markings were changed from two lanes to one and a cycle lane (half way up the road). All cars ignore the road markings and squeeze two lanes of traffic to the edge of the kerb.it's a joke, and dangerous, besides being 100m from Kilmainham garda station. Cars at the new Hilton Hotel opposite IMMA/Royal Hospital constantly drive in the cycle lane. I agree with the poster who notes that if all the cyclists decided to feck it and drive from now on, the traffic would be worse, much worse. Drivers, cyclists are your friend. They reduce traffic. Give us some space. Please.

cyclopath2001

tampopo wrote:

Civilian_Target wrote:

think they're quite hazardous to cyclists and I notice any rececntly redeveloped street never has them.
QUOTE]
All cars ignore the road markings and squeeze two lanes of traffic to the edge of the kerb.i

I've noticed a practice by trucks & cars to drive with the left-hand wheels exactly on the continous white line marking the boundary of the cycle track. Over time, this has the effect of erasing the marking. There's many examples around town of obliterated cycle tracks where motorists can happily claim ignorance & drive in them.

The #1 key point in road safety advice, should be to always try and make eye contact with anyone, motorist, pedestrian other cyclist who might be about to conflict with you.

I recall a reprt that being blonde & attractive, might get you more road space than a hi-vis vest.

Capt'n Midnight

cyclopath2001 wrote:

tampopo wrote:

I recall a reprt that being blonde & attractive, might get you more road space than a hi-vis vest.

not even blonde - a wig would do.

hunnymonster

I've read that research and it seems pretty sound. Long blonde hair (helmetless) cyclists were involved in less accidents than cyclists with helmets. They also probed the theory that the helmeted cyclists felt more invincible but dismissed that based on a blind study of road users.


Here is another interesting one
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1695668.ece
The people involved in the research sound like they should be compitent but I can't help picking holes in it. Then again I should go and read the details rather than just the bits that made the paper.

robfitz

DadaKopf wrote:

Exactly. And I just found out a colleague of mine was killed cycling down Wolfe Tone Quay by a skip truck this week. She was extremely safety-conscious, and it just goes to show how cyclists are made more vulnerable by idiotic, stupid, impatient drivers.

I'm very sorry to hear about your colleague.

I've made an effort to visit the location of all the recent fatal cycling accidents in Dublin as soon as possible after they occurred. These are my photos from the location the day after the accident on Wolfe Tone Quay and Temple Street West.

DadaKopf would you mind giving me some more information about the cyclists, like which direction was your colleague likely to have been cycling in at that time in the morning, etc., PM me if you don't want to give the details on the forum.

Traumadoc

There was a man killed last year in tallaght - He wasin the cycle lane a truck turning left got the feeder arrow to turn left and the cyclist was trapped under the wheels. A lot of the fatalities seem to have the feature of a truck turning left.

Civilian_Target

Very much so - never go up the left at a green light, ever. Just wait with the cars....

beans

Aye, general rule when coming up on the back of a truck:

<-- Suicide ..... Passing Side -->

DirkVoodoo

Maybe we should have the haulage company bring in a blindside mirror. Mount it so that its pointing down next to the cab, give them a better view of their front side. Not sure about angles/positioning, just a thought that came to me there.

EDIT: or maybe just ask drivers to please use their mirrors. I brought my brother out driving and nearly hit him for turning left without looking over his shoulder.

youcancallmeal

A friend of a friend was killed a few years ago on the Walkinstown roundabout and I've heard of a few other fatalities there, I 've even had an accident on that roundabout myself :eek: Anyone who knows it will know how dangerous it is.

Also I cycle up the quays and then back down them every day on the way to work and I absolutely hate it. My main rule is always give Trucks/Buses the right of way and never get too close to them. Its crazy, only last week I came upon two buses sitting side by side in traffic with maybe a foot or two between them, just barely enough room to cycle between them basically. In front of me was a cyclist who went straight ahead and didnt even slow down to consider the danger he might put himself in, the bus on the left pulled to the right a few inches in preparation to rejoin traffic after picking up passengers and the guys bike was literally sandwiched, any further and it would of been him. The mad thing is he started going apesh*t at the bus driver, stupidest thing I've ever seen. I still cringe when I think about it now.

Danbo!

Hi everyone,
Fairly new to boards.ie as you can see, I am a daily commuter from south west dublin to the city centre and i have experienced much of what has been discussed here... I do break red lights often, sometimes, for example at cross-roads when the ped lights are green and theres no-one crossing.. had a nasty one though about a year ago though, breaking a red light at a T-junction in templeogue/terenure, one i had broken daily because it was "perfectly safe to do so." there is an entrance to a house on the left i had never given a second thought until the owner pulled out having seen the traffic stopped. i wasnt hit, but i swerved and hit the ground, certainly scared the bejaysus out of me.. and thank god your man was very sound about it.

Quick question also.. anyone know if its illegal to cycle on a road where a footpath-type cycle track is provided? from templeogue bridge down to the village there is generally cars parked on it/cars pulling out or good aul bin day, so i choose to use the road, seems to get some drivers fairly angry.

youcancallmeal

noblestee wrote:

Quick question also.. anyone know if its illegal to cycle on a road where a footpath-type cycle track is provided? from templeogue bridge down to the village there is generally cars parked on it/cars pulling out or good aul bin day, so i choose to use the road, seems to get some drivers fairly angry.

That cycle path is lethal but I would normally use it as opposed to staying on the road. I wouldn't see any reason why it would be illegal to use the road though, if anything is illegal its the idiots that always park in the cycle lane.

daymobrew

noblestee wrote:

Quick question also.. anyone know if its illegal to cycle on a road where a footpath-type cycle track is provided? from templeogue bridge down to the village there is generally cars parked on it/cars pulling out or good aul bin day, so i choose to use the road, seems to get some drivers fairly angry.

Describe the sign that is at the start of this cycle track. If it shows a pedestrian and bike it is not a legal sign therefore you don't have to use that cycle track.
You should report the parked cars to the Gardai.

tywy

daymobrew wrote:

Describe the sign that is at the start of this cycle track. If it shows a pedestrian and bike it is not a legal sign therefore you don't have to use that cycle track.
You should report the parked cars to the Gardai.

what you mean if it shows a ped and a bike it's not legal? how come we have them then. the crapness of Ireland's signage has confused me again

Danbo!

daymobrew wrote:

Describe the sign that is at the start of this cycle track. If it shows a pedestrian and bike it is not a legal sign therefore you don't have to use that cycle track.
You should report the parked cars to the Gardai.

Ill have a look on my way home later on... i have seen that ped & cycles sign in bushy park.. its when your heading from terenure to templeogue and the road gets too thin, so they 'cleverly' stuck a sign saying cycle track and an arrow pointing left. sends you into a housing estate so the cycle track is just a residential road. (anyone know it?) doesnt bother me too much, but when you go through bushy you get some irrate walkers who dont like to get outta the way.

daymobrew wrote:

You should report the parked cars to the Gardai.

Tried this before in rathmines. Dominos pizza delivery guys park there line of honda 50's along the cycle track. Pain in the ass in rush hour traffic. i've gone into rathmines garda stations a few times and they said they'd sort it out. but nothing yet. :mad:

And just in case any of you didnt know

"Contravention of restrictions of driving a vehicle on a cycle track" is an offence carrying 1 penalty point or 3 if contested and convicted in court..

Most of our boys in blue dont even know this..

might get this -
http://www.penaltypoints.ie/driving_offences.php
printed out on a nice hi-vis t-shirt.

daymobrew

tywy wrote:

what you mean if it shows a ped and a bike it's not legal? how come we have them then. the crapness of Ireland's signage has confused me again

Someone on this forum keeps reminding us that the ped/bike sign is not in the legislation.
I looked at the the new Rules of the Road (5.5MB PDF) and this sign is not listed there. Other cycle track signs are.
Basically it means that the sign is not legally binding and you can choose whether you use that cycle track.

youcancallmeal

noblestee wrote:

Ill have a look on my way home later on... i have seen that ped & cycles sign in bushy park.. its when your heading from terenure to templeogue and the road gets too thin, so they 'cleverly' stuck a sign saying cycle track and an arrow pointing left. sends you into a housing estate so the cycle track is just a residential road. (anyone know it?) doesnt bother me too much, but when you go through bushy you get some irrate walkers who dont like to get outta the way.

I know the one your talking about, in fact I remember there being a thread around here not too long ago which had pictures of ridiculous cyclepath situations (e.g. A traffic light pole sitting right in the middle of a cycle path) and the turn off you describe is pictured in it. Must try and find it...

markpb

daymobrew wrote:

Someone on this forum keeps reminding us that the ped/bike sign is not in the legislation.
I looked at the the new Rules of the Road (5.5MB PDF) and this sign is not listed there. Other cycle track signs are.
Basically it means that the sign is not legally binding and you can choose whether you use that cycle track.

Then I guess the next time a garda from the Traffic Corp insists I use the cycle lane on Drumcondra road south (between Berties office and Clonliffe road), I can (politely) tell him to stuff it?

Good stuff, I hate that lane :-)

cyclopath2001

markpb wrote:

Then I guess the next time a garda from the Traffic Corp insists I use the cycle lane on Drumcondra road south (between Berties office and Clonliffe road), I can (politely) tell him to stuff it? Good stuff, I hate that lane :-)

Well, they may be able to book you on the basis that some obscure document in the basement of the Civic Offices designated it as a Cycle Track within the law, but you'd probably, in court, be able to get the charge dismissed on the technicality that the City Council didn't use the road sign required by the law. There's also another issue which is that the regulations require shared footway/cycleways to have a cycling section marked distinctly/separately. Councils sometimes ignore this regulation too.

I argued the toss with a cop concerning the track on the North-Strand inbound, where the sign was removed nearly 2 years ago & the markings are unclear. He was very interested in who had removed the sign. It was only when I suggested that City Council, and not vandals, had removed it as it was being dug up & I further speculated that they were not replacing it until the track had been inspected and certified by the city engineer, that he let me off the hook.

Passing motorists probably thought (smugly) I was getting a ticking off, but the Garda then went on to tell me about all the other unlawful stuff that the City Council is doing and which is causing him a headache trying to keep order on the roads.

Raam

cyclopath2001 wrote:

Passing motorists probably thought (smugly) I was getting a ticking off, but the Garda then went on to tell me about all the other unlawful stuff that the City Council is doing and which is causing him a headache trying to keep order on the roads.

that track is brutal alright. What else did he say the council are doing?

markpb

cyclopath2001 wrote:

Well, they may be able to book you on the basis that some obscure document in the basement of the Civic Offices designated it as a Cycle Track within the law, but you'd probably, in court, be able to get the charge dismissed on the technicality that the City Council didn't use the road sign required by the law. There's also another issue which is that the regulations require shared footway/cycleways to have a cycling section marked distinctly/separately. Councils sometimes ignore this regulation too.

The track on the southbound side is split in two, but there's no markings at all on the otherside. They're both absolutely awful and incredibly dangerous, I even have a mail from some guy in DCC saying as much but they're not willing to fix it. Apparently the upgrade of the QBC will fix "some of my issues".

cyclopath2001

King Raam wrote:

that track is brutal alright. What else did he say the council are doing?

Passed that location today, it was completely blocked by plastic fencing & no attempt made to warn cyclists at the entry point or to divert back into the bus lane. A taxi driver tried to force me off the road just before the obstruction.

It's about 6 months ago, but the Garda told me about some contra-flows and bus-only filter signals in the city centre where he was told to stop drivers breaking the rule, but he then found out that the signals were not legal. Even on the North Strand he was a bit pissed off as the markings are so chaotic that it's difficult for him to apply the rules there.