Weird No Bikes stickers on some cars

John_Rambo

Hi everyone, has anyone seen these? I’ve seen “don’t pass on the inside if I’m turning left” type stickers on trucks, fair enough. But these are weird. Can anyone explain?

File attached. Sticker on the left.

John_Rambo

John_Rambo wrote: »

Hi everyone, has anyone seen these? I’ve seen “don’t pass on the inside if I’m turning left” type stickers on trucks, fair enough. But these are weird. Can anyone explain?

File attached. Sticker on the left.

That’s a ‘car van’ and the sticker is to alert cyclists to be cautious. The driver has reduced vision and a larger blindspot than a normal Focus car would have.

It’s not anti-cyclist, it’s a safety measure of sorts.

ANXIOUS

Also looks like a commercial so I'd say maybe Fleet hire company put it on.

rollingscone

JayZeus wrote: »

That’s a ‘car van’ and the sticker is to alert cyclists to be cautious. The driver has reduced vision and a larger blindspot than a normal Focus car would have.

It’s not anti-cyclist, it’s a safety measure of sorts.

This.

magicbastarder

i don't see where the increased blind spot would be on that car though.

Tzardine

magicbastarder wrote: »

i don't see where the increased blind spot would be on that car though.

It has no rear windows.

coolisin

magicbastarder wrote: »

i don't see where the increased blind spot would be on that car though.

It’s a van he has no windows in the back other then the rear window.
So you have massive blind spots.

magentis

magicbastarder wrote: »

i don't see where the increased blind spot would be on that car though.

It's much easier to look through a rear side window than a steel panel in its place on a van.

magicbastarder

magicbastarder wrote: »

i don't see where the increased blind spot would be on that car though.

Which is exactly why that sticker is put there.

If you haven't driven one, you'd probably never realise how much of an impact it has on your view of cyclists/traffic to your left when you shoulder check and only see out the front passenger window and the rear window. There's a blind spot there that's big enough to hide a car in (literally), never mind a cyclist.

elperello

magicbastarder wrote: »

i don't see where the increased blind spot would be on that car though.

No rear side windows.
Makes a big difference.
If you know anyone who has one ask them to let you sit in the drivers seat and you will see for yourself.

TheBlaaMan

Good to hear from those that know, but..............the sign isn't very intuitive. I don't think (and its borne out by the responses on the thread) that this sign is well understood, at all, by its target audience, cyclists. To any reasonable viewer, that sign say "no cyclists"....wtf are we supposed to read into that?

There really are LOTS of better alternative signs....

Wildly Boaring

Have one from work. Number 4 at this stage.

Ridiculously dangerous blind spot.

Can't understand why the definition of commercial includes blanking window. Be just as much a van with window and no back seats. One way glass or a heavy tint be far better if they must.

Or even stipulating larger mirror with convex below??

Put additional cameras in on last couple but need not as initiative as mirrors.

Don't do much city driving (prefer to cycle) but no hope of seeing someone sat there on bike.

Changing lanes when there's a merge coming in at same time is lethal.

elperello

Windows in back would suit some users but others ie. tradesmen, plumbers etc. need to rack out the back for tools, parts etc and need panels.

Wildly Boaring

elperello wrote: »

Windows in back would suit some users but others ie. tradesmen, plumbers etc. need to rack out the back for tools, parts etc and need panels.

Most lads like that have at least a transit connect size. Least these have proper mirrors. More the focus/auris sized I have.

Actually do a blind spot check in lot of companies and end up adding mirrors to lot of these. Current employer don't.

The option of window be nice at least.

TheBlaaMan

TheBlaaMan wrote: »

Good to hear from those that know, but..............the sign isn't very intuitive. I don't think (and its borne out by the responses on the thread) that this sign is well understood, at all, by its target audience, cyclists. To any reasonable viewer, that sign say "no cyclists"....wtf are we supposed to read into that?

There really are LOTS of better alternative signs....

I love it. Drivers/Fleet try to do something to help cyclists remain safe, cyclists find something else to complain about! :P

Seriously, it's an issue to be taken up with the RSA because it needs to be better communicated to cyclists. The guy sitting in the carvan knows, absolutely 100% knows, that blindspot could contain something that's going to ruin his day. The cyclists (like those here) who never knew such a blindspot existed and take up a position in it anyway are the ones who are at risk and best able to ensure the blindspot remains empty.

Not having a go. I've driven car-vans for years and hundreds of thousands of miles in cities. Also a friend was dragged under the back axle bogey on a HGV trailer and killed years back, sitting in a blindspot where the driver could never have known of his presence, so I'm well aware that sometimes it's 100% down to the cyclist to come out of something safely.

This one isn't a them-vs-us, so take it as a sign of good intent that carvan drivers/fleet-owners want to make sure everyone stays safe. Get onto the RSA and push for whatever education/standardisation of warning signs for cyclist you feel are most appropriate, perhaps?

TheBlaaMan

JayZeus wrote: »

I love it. Drivers/Fleet try to do something to help cyclists remain safe, cyclists find something else to complain about! :P


This one isn't a them-vs-us, so take it as a sign of good intent that carvan drivers/fleet-owners want to make sure everyone stays safe. Get onto the RSA and push for whatever education/standardisation of warning signs for cyclist you feel are most appropriate, perhaps?

Look, I think its good that the operator (W39 in this case) have put a sign on the van. It is good CSR policy to be fair and I hope that its not just a 'box-ticking exercise' on their behalf. I drive 60k per year and cycle another 5-10k and am well used to a variety of road signs; my surprise at the form of the sign is just that - surprise that if they have put one up, they haven't really conveyed the message that they are trying to convey.. I've never seen it before and suspect that 99% of cyclists will look at it and just not get the message. Sure, cyclists have to take responsibility for their positioning on the road but this looks like a lost message, to be honest, and it need not be - there are clearly better alternative signs.

odyssey06

Hmm some sort of camera perhaps? Is a small sticker the best we can do in 2017???

magicbastarder

elperello wrote: »

No rear side windows.
Makes a big difference.
If you know anyone who has one ask them to let you sit in the drivers seat and you will see for yourself.

cheers, not exactly the best angle to photograph a car from to see that there are no rear windows, to be fair!
i've driven (albeit rarely) 'commercial' vehicles and i don't like them, probably mainly cos i'm not used to them. the lack of visibility *was* unnerving.

Wishbone Ash

JayZeus wrote: »

....If you haven't driven one, you'd probably never realise how much of an impact it has on your view of cyclists/traffic to your left when you shoulder check and only see out the front passenger window and the rear window. There's a blind spot there that's big enough to hide a car in (literally), never mind a cyclist.

At least it has a rear window. I used to have a van than had no side or rear windows giving an even bigger blind spot.

rollingscone

JayZeus wrote: »

I love it. Drivers/Fleet try to do something to help cyclists remain safe, cyclists find something else to complain about! :P

Seriously, it's an issue to be taken up with the RSA because it needs to be better communicated to cyclists. The guy sitting in the carvan knows, absolutely 100% knows, that blindspot could contain something that's going to ruin his day. The cyclists (like those here) who never knew such a blindspot existed and take up a position in it anyway are the ones who are at risk and best able to ensure the blindspot remains empty.

Not having a go. I've driven car-vans for years and hundreds of thousands of miles in cities. Also a friend was dragged under the back axle bogey on a HGV trailer and killed years back, sitting in a blindspot where the driver could never have known of his presence, so I'm well aware that sometimes it's 100% down to the cyclist to come out of something safely.

This one isn't a them-vs-us, so take it as a sign of good intent that carvan drivers/fleet-owners want to make sure everyone stays safe. Get onto the RSA and push for whatever education/standardisation of warning signs for cyclist you feel are most appropriate, perhaps?

This is 100% the issue. The RSA could have a huge impact on cycle safety by addressing public ignorance that has cyclists both genuinely (e.g. thinking they're legally pedestrians) behaving in ways that diminish predictability and co-operative road use.

But instead they just repeatedly rattle on about hivis and helmets as an easy out.

magicbastarder

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

At least it has a rear window. I used to have a van than had no side or rear windows giving an even bigger blind spot.

that's not a blind spot. the 'spot' describes the actual total field of view of the driver.

Lumen

There's no blind spot if appropriate mirrors are fitted, except for directly behind the vehicle.

So this is just a bad/ incomplete conversion surely.

The small ambiguous sticker is just an admission that they know this.

Wishbone Ash

magicbastarder wrote: »

that's not a blind spot. the 'spot' describes the actual total field of view of the driver.

Yes, point taken.

Macy0161

Whats the point of the sticker if the intended audience doesn't know what it means? No credit from me to the company to be honest.

Again, as with other vehicles, if there's known issues and obvious blind spots, the solution should be mirrors/ cameras/ sensors, not just a sticker. Sticker on it's own is pure box ticking - "but you're honour, we did put a sticker on the vehicle..."

Lumen

Lumen wrote: »

There's no blind spot if appropriate mirrors are fitted, except for directly behind the vehicle.

So this is just a bad/ incomplete conversion surely.

The small ambiguous sticker is just an admission that they know this.

You clearly don’t know what you’re writing about.

Macy0161

Macy0161 wrote: »

Whats the point of the sticker if the intended audience doesn't know what it means? No credit from me to the company to be honest.

Again, as with other vehicles, if there's known issues and obvious blind spots, the solution should be mirrors/ cameras/ sensors, not just a sticker. Sticker on it's own is pure box ticking - "but you're honour, we did put a sticker on the vehicle..."

There’s no talking sense to some people.

Lumen

JayZeus wrote: »

You clearly don’t know what you’re writing about.

Probably, but can you be more specific?

hesker

JayZeus wrote: »

You clearly don’t know what you’re writing about.

He has a very valid point.

As a cyclist I am very aware of blind spots and don’t go there.

However I was talking to an artic driver recently with 40 years experience and hazchem licence etc who also cycles. So I asked him about blind spots. He said in his artic there are none along the sides due to appropriate mirrors.

So isn’t it about time these became mandatory.

It’s still not a good idea to go up the inside of trucks for other reasons but we can do better than just putting stickers on the backs of vehicles.

ednwireland

TheBlaaMan wrote: »

Good to hear from those that know, but..............the sign isn't very intuitive. I don't think (and its borne out by the responses on the thread) that this sign is well understood, at all, by its target audience, cyclists. To any reasonable viewer, that sign say "no cyclists"....wtf are we supposed to read into that?

There really are LOTS of better alternative signs....

maybe write to the company and point out the sign might be misinterpreted and give them the alternatives, at least they are trying to eductate road users and if theyve gone as far as this already i presume they train their drivers so might be thankful of constructive critisicm

rollingscone

hesker wrote: »

He has a very valid point.

As a cyclist I am very aware of blind spots and don’t go there.

However I was talking to an artic driver recently with 40 years experience and hazchem licence etc who also cycles. So I asked him about blind spots. He said in his artic there are none along the sides due to appropriate mirrors.

So isn’t it about time these became mandatory.

It’s still not a good idea to go up the inside of trucks for other reasons but we can do better than just putting stickers on the backs of vehicles.

Mirrors help but since you also need to move your eyes between them (for you know, the other side of the truck) tbere is significant time lapse which is where many cv and hgv drivers get caught out.

To be fair they are often victims of the stupidity of others. Many a time a car has jammed itself in to blindspot of a truck in the second or so between checking that side and the other.

In built up areas the game is rigged against HGVs and really it should be mandated that wherever feasible deliveries should be subdivided into smaller vans (gasp you mean create jobs!) somewhere on the periphery.

Sadly this would be difficult to sell to fleet operators in our current "Hungry Hungry Hippos" socio-economic model.

As for cyclists squeezing down the sides of vehicles, again maybe the RSA could sacrifice one hivis ad for promoting something that has more than a marginal impact on road safety.

what_traffic

Maybe approach the problem from a different angle.
Would this vehicle be roadworthy in other European Countrys?
A regular Ford Transit CarVan has far better side mirrors than this Ford Focus vehicle.