Vehicles blocking Cyclists passing

greenwaving

RayCun wrote: »

but the cyclists are in a safe position - behind a vehicle - and choosing to go to a dangerous position - the left of a turning vehicle. So safety doesn't seem to be the motivating factor in their action.

Not always. ASL are there for a reason - to allow cyclists to safely wait and move off ahead of traffic precisely because being in the middle of a lane of traffic behind, in front of and sandwiched beside multiple vehicles can be dangerous. I "take the lane" when required and wait behind traffic if it appears to be unsafe to filter ahead. But I am definitely in a vulnerable position. So ideally I can safely filter to the top of the line of traffic and position myself ahead of the cars in a very visible (and therefore safe) position.
BTW I never undertake large vehicles unless there is plenty of space and visibility. I am always conscious and wary of left turning cars, with or without indicators and even those stopped at red lights. My safety is my priority but to be honest I don't feel much safer on the road knowing that some drivers deliberately block my designated lane just to prevent me from "screwing them over". Thats the furthest thing from a safe attitude.

Macy0161

RayCun wrote: »

but the cyclists are in a safe position - behind a vehicle - and choosing to go to a dangerous position - the left of a turning vehicle. So safety doesn't seem to be the motivating factor in their action.

Safest position in a queue is the front. This is recognised, and that is why Advanced Stop Lines for cyclists exist.

droidus

I dont think a driver who doesn't know what an ASL should be lecturing anybody about legalities.

Chips Lovell

I'm not wild about Advanced Stop Boxes. The box itself is fine, but I think they create more problems than they solve because they tend to encourage dangerous and unnecessary overtakes from cyclists you think that just because the box is there, they need to be up there.

ted1

jim o doom wrote: »

somewhere between 2 to 5 cyclists in a row break the law and prevent me from turning left at a set of lights which I am currently at the head of.. when I'm on the motorbike.

It might be downtown your road position .
Where are you on the road? You may be in their blind spot. Move left.
Also what size are your indicators? Some bike have small one you don’t notice.

ted1

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I'm not wild about Advanced Stop Boxes. The box itself is fine, but I think they create more problems than they solve because they tend to encourage dangerous and unnecessary overtakes from cyclists you think that just because the box is there, they need to be up there.

They are the safest spot to be.
Cars won’t turn into it. And cars trucks, busses etc will see you in front of them

Chips Lovell

ted1 wrote: »

They are the safest spot to be.
Cars won’t turn into it. And cars trucks, busses etc will see you in front of them

As I said, the box itself is fine. It's just that some people move up into it when they don't need to. And some take unnecessary risks while doing so.

the_pen_turner

Why do they think those boxes are the safest way. Surely the most dangerous part cycling is being overtaken. Those boxes put the cyclist in a position where they will be continually overtaken

I was in a city a while back that had them and was a passenger in a car foing through a series of junctions with these. We overtook the cyclists several times and they filtered through again into the box.
Surely letting the cars off first would leave the cyclists in a safer position

Macy0161

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

As I said, the box itself is fine. It's just that some people move up into it when they don't need to. And some take unnecessary risks while doing so.

It's still not up to other road users to force the choice on cyclists though, but blocking filtering and/or cycle lanes.

Duffryman

droidus wrote: »

I dont think a driver who doesn't know what an ASL should be lecturing anybody about legalities.

In fairness, I think it was the acronym ASL he didn't recognise, rather than him not knowing that the space up front is for cyclists.

RayCun

Macy0161 wrote: »

Safest position in a queue is the front. This is recognised, and that is why Advanced Stop Lines for cyclists exist.

The safest position is the front, but if you need to perform dangerous undertakes to get there you are putting yourself in an unsafe position.

If you are approaching a junction and you see the lights go red, and you know you have a minute or two to undertake or filter between lanes to get to the ASL - sure, that makes sense.

But a lot of cyclists clearly don't know (or don't care) when the traffic is going to start moving, because they undertake moving vehicles.

Macy0161

the_pen_turner wrote: »

Why do they think those boxes are the safest way. Surely the most dangerous part cycling is being overtaken. Those boxes put the cyclist in a position where they will be continually overtaken

I was in a city a while back that had them and was a passenger in a car foing through a series of junctions with these. We overtook the cyclists several times and they filtered through again into the box.
Surely letting the cars off first would leave the cyclists in a safer position

Because of this...

ted1 wrote: »

Cars won’t turn into it. And cars trucks, busses etc will see you in front of them

the_pen_turner

Macy0161 wrote: »

Because of this...

If the cyclist was behind then it wouldn't matter if the vehiclea in front could see them or not. Those vehicles are going away from the cyclist Insead of overtaking them

Chips Lovell

the_pen_turner wrote: »

Why do they think those boxes are the safest way. Surely the most dangerous part cycling is being overtaken. Those boxes put the cyclist in a position where they will be continually overtaken

I was in a city a while back that had them and was a passenger in a car foing through a series of junctions with these. We overtook the cyclists several times and they filtered through again into the box.
Surely letting the cars off first would leave the cyclists in a safer position

Basically, it's the same as driving. You should only overtake if you're going to make progress. Pointless overtaking, whether you're driving or cycling just creates more potential hazards and slows the traffic flow down.

So if you arrive at a set of lights and there's only a handful of vehicles behind you, take the lane at the back of of the queue, because you're going to make it through on the next sequence. You only move up if there's a chance you won't make it through, i.e. if there's an opportunity to make progress.

Macy0161

I think ASL and when it's safe to pass on the left are two different debates.

• Cyclists moving to the ASL, when it is safe to pass on the left, it is the safest position to be in.
• If a cyclist can't make it ahead of an indicating vehicle or before the traffic moves off, they should wait in line.
• The main objection seems to be from people in motorised vehicles being held up for a few seconds by cyclists that make the ASL safely, or deciding they they don't have the patience to wait should a cyclist try to make the top before the lights change.

plodder

jim o doom wrote: »

The problem with what you are stating is that the moment the vehicle at the head of the traffic goes to turn, there will not be a single cyclist, but a continual stream of bicycles preventing said vehicle from turning.

That is a problem, but the answer is better education/enforcement rather than blocking the road imo. The cyclists other than the one or two at the front should allow the car to turn left.

A vechile indicating left at the head of the traffic is the lead vehicle, and it is turning left. Common sense is not something a lot of road users have, so you can either hope the cyclist on the inside isn't a fool, or you can ensure they cannot undertake you. I'm going with the option that doesn't rely on a member of the public to be intelligent.

I'm both a driver and a cyclist, and it's not even clear to me what the legal situation is with a cycle track in this situation. The example in the OP (leaving aside the bad example that it is) was a regular traffic lane with no cycle track marked.

Maybe someone can tell me, what if any difference is there in the turn left situation, when a car signals to turn left and a stream of bikes, but in a bike lane, pass on the left forcing the car to sit there and wait. I think the bikes should give way to let the car to turn left, but I'm not certain of the legal situation.

jim o doom

I did not know what the ASL acronym meant, thank you for telling me what it means. I know what the paint markings indicate, just not the acronym.

droidus - I hope you know every single acronym which relates to any subject which you have an opinion on, because if not, you are being hypocritical.

I'm actually cycling signifcantly more regularly than I cycle, and regardless of that, I will continue to prevent people from undertaking me by angling my vehicle to the left at the head of the traffic where I plan to turn.

If anybody wants to get their knickers in a twist about me performing an action which is essentially designed to prevent the more stupid cyclists flying up the inside when I'm turning, that's fine, get them in a twist, it won't change anything.

I'm not doing it to annoy any cyclist, I AM a cyclist myself and far more often than I drive. I'm doing it to stop the dangerous ones cutting up the inside, for both my and their safety. This behaviour doesn't just occur when the lights are red going to green, it happens when vehicles are ahead and in the midst of turning left, and idiots still try to fly up the inside.

Prevention is better than the litigation anyone would face after hitting some tool flying up the inside when turning left. Sadly common sense is lacking in most road users, regardless of their mode of transport.

ted1

the_pen_turner wrote: »

If the cyclist was behind then it wouldn't matter if the vehiclea in front could see them or not. Those vehicles are going away from the cyclist Insead of overtaking them

If you are at the side of the road a truck or bus could pull up beside you while Q’ing.

Best to put yourself in a position that makes you visible.

RayCun

ted1 wrote: »

If you are at the side of the road a truck or bus could pull up beside you while Q’ing.

Best to put yourself in a position that makes you visible.

If you are waiting at the side of the road, or taking the lane behind other traffic, then you are visible to the truck or bus as it pulls up behind you.

ted1

RayCun wrote: »

If you are waiting at the side of the road, or taking the lane behind other traffic, then you are visible to the truck or bus as it pulls up behind you.

I said beside ... not behind. If there’s a few bikes you might be back a few meters from the light.

So you are not visible and are now in a position where a large HGV doesn’t see you and might pull in

RayCun

ted1 wrote: »

I said beside ... not behind. If there’s a few bikes you might be back a few meters from the light.

So you are not visible and are now in a position where a large HGV doesn’t see you and might pull in

So there's a queue of stopped bikes in front of you, and a HGV comes from behind you, and you think if you don't go to the front of the queue of stopped bikes the HGV won't see you?

Wishbone Ash

OleRodrigo wrote: »

What bothers me is waiting behind a bus instead of passing through the narrow gap on the left....only to find other cyclists tut tutting from behind and mounting the pavement to pass instead.

Happens regularly on the North Quays during morning rush hour, outside the 4 courts.

I slowed down behind a bus on the north quays yesterday afternoon as the gap on it's left was a bit narrow.

A cyclist behind roared "G'wan ye gobshite".

Charming!:)

greenwaving

RayCun wrote: »

ted1 wrote: »

I said beside ... not behind. If there’s a few bikes you might be back a few meters from the light.

So you are not visible and are now in a position where a large HGV doesn’t see you and might pull in

So there's a queue of stopped bikes in front of you, and a HGV comes from behind you, and you think if you don't go to the front of the queue of stopped bikes the HGV won't see you?

I think you are being unnecessarily pedantic. The ASLs are in place because in most situations it is much safer for the cyclist to be ahead in a visible position away from traffic. It also allows cyclists turning right to get ahead safely to be able to make the turn without having to cross lanes of traffics. No one is advocating cyclists blinding pushing ahead to ASLs if is unsafe to do so. Some cyclists may preform dangerous and unnecessary manoeuvres just as some car drivers do. But I haven't heard one person on this thread advocating or supporting this behaviour. We are simply pointing out that if possible it is a much safer position for a cyclist to be in compared with sandwiched in amongst traffic. If you dont understand the difference in the safety between the two positions I suggest you hop on a bike to experience it first hand. We do however have a driver (who also cycles so that makes it ok) admitting to purposely blocking cycle lanes to prevent cyclists safely undertaking on the off chance one rogue cyclist might undertake him while he turns. It would be much more reasonable for drivers to allow cyclists to safely move into a visible position at the top of the junction and use their mirrors and slow down for the odd rogue cyclist who tries to undertake as they are turning.

RayCun

" If you dont understand the difference in the safety between the two positions I suggest you hop on a bike to experience it first hand."

I cycle, which is why I said

RayCun wrote: »

The safest position is the front, but if you need to perform dangerous undertakes to get there you are putting yourself in an unsafe position.

"the odd rogue cyclist who tries to undertake as they are turning"

About as odd as red light jumpers in cars, unfortunately.

punisher5112

I'm still waiting on a response from the person whom originally started this thread to explain how the bus is actually blocking them and others.

As it's been pointed out numerous times it actually just about fits in the lane itself with mirrors actually sticking outside the lane it's in....

I would love to show people what our view is like from inside the cab and how many blind spots there are.

AndrewJRenko

I'm not sure if this is what the OP had in mind, but I get really narked when I see vehicles blocking cyclists or pedestrians at junctions like those along the Grand Canal cycle track. I'd bet a fiver these drivers don't block car junctions like this, but they don't seem to give a second thought to blocking cyclists or pedestrians, sometimes very large numbers of cyclists and pedestrians, maybe 50+ people crossing from each side at Leeson St bridge at rush hour.

the_pen_turner

i often see car blocking roads like that. especially small roundabouts.

Ray Bloody Purchase

This genius made me think of this thread on the cycle home yesterday evening. They're stopped at the red light.

I'd wager a few ahead of him broke the lights and the red was too stale by the time he got to where he is.

Macy0161

Years ago, before I was a regular cyclists, I did try to find out the status of ASL/ Box. In those ignorant days, I'd been caught in a similar position to that car - as part of the traffic crawling, I obeyed the lights and yellow box but got caught at the ASL.

These days, with a number of years of cycle commuting under my belt, when I'm driving I treat them as the same as a yellow box, but I'm still not sure whether they have that status tbh. It's just a personal decision not to be a untc.