Speeding cyclist

[puzzle007]

This morning there could have been a terrible accident if not fatal. I was standing in the middle of the crossing, the one on lordship lane just past Underhill road. The lights had changed and the green man up. There was a massive lorry and a bus the curb side of the road. The lorry probably turning left at the harvester. The lorry and bus had obviously stopped as the lights changed. I looked to check the green man knowing the vehicles had stopped then I looked directly to my left to see a cyclist coming at a ridiculous speed towards where I would have been crossing he went past so fast I was shocked, he must have been doing a speed of at least 35 m p h. It was as though the traffic lights never existed. I don't think the guy in the lorry could believe it either. So lucky I didn't rely on the green man and vehicles stopping to cross the road. I always check when the lights change before I cross and during crossing. Today I felt really glad I do this every time. As for the guy he was only young looked like a college boy. He was not wearing a helmet. So to you the guy with the lovely immaculate red hair you need to slow down and wear a helmet because you will kill yourself,or someone else cycling like you did this morning. Please take care people even when crossing at lights.

[Passiflora]

Thanks for bringing this to our attention puzzle.

I would agree that traffic lights don't exist for cyclists (I'm sure we've all seen this in action if you drive a car) but beg to differ if you're a cyclist!

I just hope that any cameras can capture situation like yours.

Cyclists don't need any insurance so they have the upper hand on car drivers/pedestrians.

[Blah Blah]

Some cyclists jump lights it's true. But not all do. I don't for example. We always remember the ones who annoy us, and forget those who don't. Hence what is often a skewed view of cyclists.

Sounds like this particular cyclist was just plain wreckless though, and as the OP says, is an accident waiting to happen.

[rendelharris]

Passiflora Wrote:

> Cyclists don't need any insurance so they have the

> upper hand on car drivers/pedestrians.

In what way would having insurance (which many cyclists, including myself, carry anyway) stop the stupid minority (and it is a minority, whatever the Daily Mail and its adherents would have one believe) from jumping red lights? Do you think the idiot puzzle007 describes thought "it's alright, I don't have insurance so I'll risk running the light?" Struggling to see the logic of your comment.

Just for interest, in the course of a forty mile ride yesterday I twice had near misses with drivers jumping red lights, a Transit driver whose excuse for running a red at Elephant was "I don't drive here much and there didn't used to be a light there" and a skip lorry down in Greenwich whose driver's witty riposte to it being pointed that he'd missed hitting me by about six inches (as I was pushing my bike across a pelican crossing with the green man in my favour) was "Pay some f**king road tax."

There are twats on bikes and twats in cars in equal proportion to the number of twats in society at large.

[Sally Eva]

One of the community councils (probably Dulwich) organised a community speedwatch on Barry Road https://www.communityspeedwatch.co.uk

This found that speeds were quite high, which would not have surprised any residents, I suspect, but surprised the police. I guess that when they drive around a bubble of well-behaved driving forms around them and they (quite reasonably) do not appreciate how drivers drive when not being observed.

The safe route for cyclists up and down this hill is Friern Road (next road south of Barry Road) or via Landells Road (and some wiggles) to Crystal Palace Road and points down that side. I have walked Barry Road but the pollution is filthy and the speeds unpleasant so I would usually take the bus if my bike was out of action.

[first mate]

Perhaps there should be a means to prosecute cyclists for dangerous/ reckless cycling in the same way there is for other road users. Clearly identification is an issue. Many more people are now cycling so I guess incidences of bad cycling will rise. What happens in countries like Holland and Denmark? Are bad cyclists penalised or are they jyst better behaved?

[rendelharris]

first mate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Perhaps there should be a means to prosecute

> cyclists for dangerous/ reckless cycling in the

> same way there is for other road users. Clearly

> identification is an issue. Many more people are

> now cycling so I guess incidences of bad cycling

> will rise. What happens in countries like Holland

> and Denmark? Are bad cyclists penalised or are

> they jyst better behaved?

This provision already exists in the Road Traffic Act which allows for dangerous, reckless, inconsiderate or careless cycling to be punished with fines of up to ?2500. Yes, obviously identification is an issue with it only really being possible to enforce if a police officer is present at the time of the behaviour ? in exactly the same way that it's impossible to enforce sanctions against the enormous number of drivers who do not keep to the speed limit when there is no camera or police officer present.

[first mate]

So currently the chances of any cyclist being brought to book are almost nil, since speed cameras have no impact on their behaviour.

As cycling increases I would think there has to be a means to penalise dangerous cycling, not least to protect other cyclists ( someone posted recently something to the effect that they did not use cycle superhighways as other cyclists stopped them cycling fast enough). BTW I feel exactly the same about idiot car drivers. In my view those who have driven cars/ vans or lorries recklessly will adopt exactly the same behaviour on a bike.

[puzzle007]

Not my comment

[BrandNewGuy]

first mate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Perhaps there should be a means to prosecute

> cyclists for dangerous/ reckless cycling in the

> same way there is for other road users. Clearly

> identification is an issue. Many more people are

> now cycling so I guess incidences of bad cycling

> will rise. What happens in countries like Holland

> and Denmark? Are bad cyclists penalised or are

> they jyst better behaved?

In Holland, they're better behaved. No-one speeds and everyone keeps ther eyes open. It can be quite a challenge walking out of Amsterdam Central Station in the rush hour, with bikes going in all directions, but none of them is fast and everyone's alert.

I wonder if the difference is down to the fact that in Dutch cities pretty much everyone cycles ? young and old, fit and infirm ? and no-one wears lycra. I despaired when Boris launched one of his London cycling initiatives and appeared alongside Bradley Wiggins. Why? That isn't going to encourage 'ordinary' people (eg the not-very-fit middle-aged) to cycle to work. It's like using Lewis Hamilton for a 'safer driving' campaign.

[rendelharris]

puzzle007 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Not my comment

I wasn't referring to your comment puzzle, which made perfect sense, I meant I was struggling to see the logic of Passiflora's peculiar assertion that not having compulsory insurance gave cyclists "the upper hand on car drivers/pedestrians." Apologies if my syntax was unclear.

[Penguin68]

Whilst I see very poor road behaviour from almost all classes of road users, it is those on two wheels who are most likely not to give warning of road manoeuvres, particularly turns - indeed when I see a cyclist signalling a turn it is a shock. In many instances I suspect it stems from poor initial training, and in particular uncertainty about riding with only one hand while signalling with the other. When a child (this is not the first time I have shared this) I was not allowed to drive on roads (in the late 50s very much less busy than now) until I could show an ability to signal left and right turns while retaining control of the bike. Bad habits and poor bike control when young lead to similar in the older (by which I mean mid twenties and thirties) commuter. Combine a lack of initial training with a gung-ho attitude to things like lights and road rules (and with bikes capable of significant speed, which my old Raleigh definitely wasn't) and you are asking for, and getting, trouble.

[puzzle007]

Thanks for the apology.

[rendelharris]

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

In Holland, they're better behaved. No-one speeds

> and everyone keeps their eyes open.

This is in large part because the segregated provision for cyclists is so much better. If one wants to survive on many streets in Central London one has to maintain a high average speed or suffer abuse and aggression from those in motor vehicles - this doesn't happen in Amsterdam. It's a two way street, if cyclists don't feel stressed and aggressed when riding their behaviour will become less stressed and aggressive - as an example the new segregated superhighways are jam packed at rush hour but I've seen virtually no bad behaviour on them.

What's the obsession with people wearing lycra, by the way? I know it looks pretty stupid on some people (it certainly does on me) but it's simply the most practical and comfortable gear for cycling. If one is commuting one can either cycle in one's work clothes (entirely impractical when it's too cold/too hot/too wet, i.e. virtually every day) or wear a different set of clothes for the journey; it makes sense to wear the most comfortable, quick drying clothing which packs away smallest, and that's specially designed cycle clothing. I really don't get it, nobody says "Oh look at that idiot going jogging in shorts and trainers when he could be wearing jeans" or "What a showoff that bloke is, wearing football boots to play football" but apparently it offends people if one dons appropriate cycle clothing for cycling.

[Mick Mac]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Some cyclists jump lights it's true. But not all

> do. I don't for example. We always remember the

> ones who annoy us, and forget those who don't.

> Hence what is often a skewed view of cyclists.

>

What other cyclists do is irrelevant. If someone drives dangerously, or drunk, or speeds, we don't start saying but most people drive sensibly within the rules., blah blah

There are a significant minority of cyclists that run red lights. It's a growing problem and only a matter of time before accidents increase.

[first mate]

BNG

Agree, cycling looks to be a young, fit person's option. You need fast reactions for sure, not least to avoid lycra speeders. I know in the past older cyclists have jumped in to say they have no issue, but, sorry, what I see in the roads daily both from car drivers, motorbikes and cyclists does not invite confidence.

[rendelharris]

Penguin68 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Whilst I see very poor road behaviour from almost

> all classes of road users, it is those on two

> wheels who are most likely not to give warning of

> road manoeuvres, particularly turns - indeed when

> I see a cyclist signalling a turn it is a shock.

Agreed - can I also put in a plea for more cyclists to thank drivers who they make way for them? I've got into the habit of signalling to turn right with my right hand, then giving the driver who's let me across a quick thumbs up with my left once across to the turning lane. Likewise, if on narrow streets a car stays behind me until it's safe to pass (without hooting or shouting!) I always raise a hand to say thank you when they do pass. Not compulsory of course but it does a little to make the roads feel more pleasant and reduce the us and them atmosphere.

[JohnL]

I'll look out for the immaculate hair (maybe he uses hair spray) :)

No helmet says something really.

[first mate]

Sorry RH, I think speed cycling is a choice that people make quite consciously, just like speeding in cars. The speeder knows it is wrong and anti social but they choose it anyway because their mindset or immediate priorities allow them to justify it.

Also think some, like boy/girl racers, just enjoy the buzz of speed and perhaps sense of personal fitness that goes with it- for the cyclist that is.

[BrandNewGuy]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> BrandNewGuy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> In Holland, they're better behaved. No-one

> speeds

> > and everyone keeps their eyes open.

>

> This is in large part because the segregated

> provision for cyclists is so much better. If one

> wants to survive on many streets in Central London

> one has to maintain a high average speed or suffer

> abuse and aggression from those in motor vehicles

> - this doesn't happen in Amsterdam. It's a two

> way street, if cyclists don't feel stressed and

> aggressed when riding their behaviour will become

> less stressed and aggressive - as an example the

> new segregated superhighways are jam packed at

> rush hour but I've seen virtually no bad behaviour

> on them.

Central Amsterdam is as awkward as central London when it comes to narrow streets, bends and tricky junctions. And they've achieved a critical mass of cyclists so that, in fact, there are proportionately far fewer cars on the road in the city centre. How you achieve that critical mass is the issue. But Boris's suggestion that we should all emulate Bradley Wiggins won't help.

> What's the obsession with people wearing lycra, by

> the way? I know it looks pretty stupid on some

> people (it certainly does on me) but it's simply

> the most practical and comfortable gear for

> cycling. If one is commuting one can either cycle

> in one's work clothes (entirely impractical when

> it's too cold/too hot/too wet, i.e. virtually

> every day) or wear a different set of clothes for

> the journey; it makes sense to wear the most

> comfortable, quick drying clothing which packs

> away smallest, and that's specially designed cycle

> clothing. I really don't get it, nobody says "Oh

> look at that idiot going jogging in shorts and

> trainers when he could be wearing jeans" or "What

> a showoff that bloke is, wearing football boots to

> play football" but apparently it offends people if

> one dons appropriate cycle clothing for cycling.

I don't mind about lycra one way or the other, but to me it signals racing. You simply don't need to wear lycra to cycle to work. The Dutch manage to cycle in their ordinary clothes and their weather is not noticeably better than ours.

[Penguin68]

a plea for more cyclists to thank drivers who they make way for them?

A couple of weeks ago I was thanked (twice, by different cyclists) for giving way in my car in a narrow passing place, where surging forward would have put the cyclist in jeopardy. I was really pleased that what I had done had both been noticed and acknowledged. It further encouraged me to continue driving considerately. I couldn't agree more with rendelharris about this.

[first mate]

Yes, I agree.

RH! No beef with lycra at all but those who cycle at ridiculous speeds often wear it. Think BNG has a point and perhaps using a bike to communte is also viewed as the opportunity for a daily workout? Nothing wrong with that so long as personal timing and fitness goals are not made an absolute priority.

[rendelharris]

first mate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sorry RH, I think speed cycling is a choice that

> people make quite consciously, just like speeding

> in cars.

I didn't mean speeding as in exceeding the speed limit, just keeping up a good 15-20 mph pace without which one is in danger of encountering aggression from motor vehicles on busy roads in London.

[rendelharris]

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Central Amsterdam is as awkward as central London

> when it comes to narrow streets, bends and tricky

> junctions. And they've achieved a critical mass of

> cyclists so that, in fact, there are

> proportionately far fewer cars on the road in the

> city centre.

> I don't mind about lycra one way or the other, but

> to me it signals racing. You simply don't need to

> wear lycra to cycle to work. The Dutch manage to

> cycle in their ordinary clothes and their weather

> is not noticeably better than ours.

There's the nub: because the Dutch have a critical mass and indeed because Amsterdam is smaller, more twisty and with fewer multi-lane main roads and far more segregated provision than London, pottering to work without breaking into a sweat (and so without becoming an antisocial menace for the rest of the office) is far more possible. As segregated cycle provision increases hopefully the relaxed "pottering" style will become more and more possible.

[first mate]

RH think you are quite lucky if you can maintain those kinds of speeds in central London at rush hour. I do cycle sometimes so not speaking from a position of complete ignorance.

A problem is that having got a degree of momentum cyclists do not want to stop- stopping and starting is extremely tiring, so they weave in and out and that creates other problems, especially if the weaving is fast. I have also noticed a number of cyclists kicking vehicles in their way.