Anti-bike signs on Bendibuses
 

d wrote:
Martin Underwood (a@b) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

No, the problem is the excessive length of bendibuses.

No, it isn't. That has just been demonstrated. It takes a few seconds to
overtake a bendibus, which is about a second more than a regular bus. ...

That extra second is significant. It prevents cyclists safely passing
bendibuses at the front of the queue at traffic lights, because it's
just long enough for the light to get from red to green and the bus to
move off. With an ordinary bus, even in the worst case you can reach
the front before it moves.

The extra length also seems to reduce drivers' willingness to wait for
a cyclist to get past before moving off from a stop. And it also means
that by the time you are back at the back of the bus and can pull in,
anything behind the bus is going considerably faster than you are.

In theory, it's not good to start to pass any bus after it starts to
signal to move off. But you have the right of way, and the bus driver
should let you go if you don't give way. The reason I often start to
pass stopped buses that are already signalling is that many bus
drivers start indicating long before they are ready to go. I've lost
count of the number of times I've had to stop behind a bus because
it's signalled to start off but hasn't moved.

Colin McKenzie

Anti-bike signs on Bendibuses
 

Neil Williams ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

No, it isn't. That has just been demonstrated. It takes a few
seconds to overtake a bendibus, which is about a second more than a
regular bus. I don't see how that's enough to reduce grown men to
crying children.

They are also widely used in London, and have been in the UK since
being introduced to Manchester somewhere around 1999. Nothing new,
and not seemingly causing too many problems there.

I must mis-remember the ones in Sheffield in the 70s, then...

Hiho.

But the problem with them in London IS real - they are just far too long
for the traffic conditions. They cause chaos.

Anti-bike signs on Bendibuses
 

Colin McKenzie ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

That extra second is significant. It prevents cyclists safely passing
bendibuses at the front of the queue at traffic lights, because it's
just long enough for the light to get from red to green and the bus to
move off. With an ordinary bus, even in the worst case you can reach
the front before it moves.

So, perhaps, just maybe, the cyclist could *wait behind the bus* at lights?
Or is there some secret reason that I "wouldn't understand, and should try
some time" as to why that can't happen?

In theory, it's not good to start to pass any bus after it starts to
signal to move off. But you have the right of way, and the bus driver
should let you go if you don't give way.

I've already recommended the HC to you - perhaps I ought to recommend it
again?

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/15.htm#143 (last point)
http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/20.htm#198

Anti-bike signs on Bendibuses
 

Colin McKenzie wrote:

That extra second is significant. It prevents cyclists safely passing
bendibuses at the front of the queue at traffic lights, because it's
just long enough for the light to get from red to green and the bus to
move off. With an ordinary bus, even in the worst case you can reach
the front before it moves.

Why do you have to get past everything? If the lights are about to
change, and the bus is about to move, you might as well wait for it.
It'll only overtake you half an inch further up the road anyway.

Neil

Anti-bike signs on Bendibuses
 

Colin McKenzie wrote:
d wrote:
Martin Underwood (a@b) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying :

No, the problem is the excessive length of bendibuses.

No, it isn't. That has just been demonstrated. It takes a few
seconds to overtake a bendibus, which is about a second more than
a regular bus. ...

That extra second is significant. It prevents cyclists safely
passing bendibuses at the front of the queue at traffic lights,
because it's just long enough for the light to get from red to
green and the bus to move off.

Then you'll have to wait behind the bus like most other road users,
won't you?

With an ordinary bus, even in the worst case you can reach the front
before it moves.

Rubbish. In the worst case, the bus driver starts moving on
red-and-amber. Even if he doesn't, you would have to pass the stop line
on red-and-amber yourself in order to get in front of him (assuming no
cyclist area at the lights).

The extra length also seems to reduce drivers' willingness to wait
for a cyclist to get past before moving off from a stop. And it also
means that by the time you are back at the back of the bus and can
pull in, anything behind the bus is going considerably faster than
you are.
In theory, it's not good to start to pass any bus after it starts to
signal to move off. But you have the right of way, and the bus
driver should let you go if you don't give way. The reason I often
start to pass stopped buses that are already signalling is that many
bus
drivers start indicating long before they are ready to go.

Which is perhaps why the bus drivers aren't willing to wait for you if
you're that foolish.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Anti-bike signs on Bendibuses
 

In article . 170,
(Adrian) wrote:

Martin Underwood (a@b) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

The problem is modern road layouts which put the cyclist on the left
hand side of the road.

No, the problem is the excessive length of bendibuses.

Ah! We agree!

I wonder how long the fashion for them will last. I noted on a visit to
York on Saturday that some of theirs have been replaced by double deckers.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Anti-bike signs on Bendibuses
 

In article ,
(d) wrote:

"Adrian" wrote in message
. 244.170...
Martin Underwood (a@b) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

The problem is modern road layouts which put the cyclist on the
left hand side of the road.

No, the problem is the excessive length of bendibuses.

No, it isn't. That has just been demonstrated. It takes a few
seconds to overtake a bendibus, which is about a second more than a
regular bus. I don't see how that's enough to reduce grown men to
crying children.

Not my experience. This is partly because they load much quicker because
they are free to use.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Anti-bike signs on Bendibuses
 

In article , a@b
(Martin Underwood) wrote:

Neil Williams wrote in message
:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

It carves cyclists up by pulling right in front of them to a stop.
They should of course let the cyclist pass the bus stop first but
they don't.

Depends what you mean by "carves up". If the cyclist has to
emergency, brake, sure. If you mean they continue a committed
overtake then pull, in after the bell was pressed, I don't have a
problem with it. Would, you otherwise propose that a bus (which can
typically travel at up to, 30mph in a city) should always follow
behind cyclists (most of whom are travelling at a much slower speed)
and never overtake? If so you, are being unrealistic.

The problem is modern road layouts which put the cyclist on the left
hand side of the road. Normally this is a sensible thing to do, but
it becomes a problem when the vehicle that is planning to turn left
or to pull over to the kerb to park (eg a bus at a bus stop) has to
cross the cycle lane. Normally, anyone planning to turn left would
position themselves in the very left-hand lane, but this option is
not available where there is a cycle lane (which powered vehicles are
prohibited to use in normal cirumstances).

The solution is to discontinue the cycle lane (with an implied give
way sign where it ends) for X yards before any junction or bus stop,
to give left-turning traffic to move over to the left kerb.

No. The answer, implemented somewhat inconsistently in London and
elsewhere, is advanced stop boxes for cyclists.

But none of the places where I have found problems with bendibuses as a
cyclist involve them turning left anyway.

They're a general menace (nothing cycle-specific) turning right at
Cambridge Circus because they block the road completely at times. The
RMs never did that.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Anti-bike signs on Bendibuses
 

In article . 170,
(Adrian) wrote:

So, perhaps, just maybe, the cyclist could *wait behind the bus* at
lights? Or is there some secret reason that I "wouldn't understand,
and should try some time" as to why that can't happen?

Given how much better a cyclist's standing start acceleration is than
that of a bus, why should they? When I wait beside or in front of a bus
at lights I am always well across the junction before the bus gets near
me.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Anti-bike signs on Bendibuses
 

Colin Rosenstiel ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

So, perhaps, just maybe, the cyclist could *wait behind the bus* at
lights? Or is there some secret reason that I "wouldn't understand,
and should try some time" as to why that can't happen?

Given how much better a cyclist's standing start acceleration is than
that of a bus, why should they? When I wait beside or in front of a bus
at lights I am always well across the junction before the bus gets near
me.

Right. So there's no problem if boyracers shove their way to the front of
the queue, then - after all, they'll be quicker away.