Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote:

On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 12:46 +0100 (BST), (Colin
Rosenstiel) wrote:

As a cyclist I find bendies a nightmare. Some of them even admit
they are a danger to cyclists by displaying yellow triangles on
their rear near sides.

Presumably to discourage cyclists from overtaking the bus on the
nearside, as this is common, but extremely dangerous, practice with
any bus or indeed any other large vehicle.

It is more dangerous to do this on a bendy than a minibus, but one
should not do it on any kind of bus unless there is a marked cycle
lane there in which to perform the manoeuvre. Even if there is,
overtaking such a vehicle on the left that is indicating to turn
left is blind stupidity, but again alarmingly common.

It's more often the other way round (other than in almost stationary
traffic when in effect cycles are moving ion a virtual lane). Buses
cut in on cyclists. Some cycle lanes actively encourage it by
stopping at bus stops.

Of course cycle lanes stop at bus stops! Are you suggesting that they
should continue through bus stops so that passengers alighting from the
bus step into the path of a cyclist?
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

In article ,
(Richard J.) wrote:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote:

On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 12:46 +0100 (BST), (Colin
Rosenstiel) wrote:

As a cyclist I find bendies a nightmare. Some of them even admit
they are a danger to cyclists by displaying yellow triangles on
their rear near sides.

Presumably to discourage cyclists from overtaking the bus on the
nearside, as this is common, but extremely dangerous, practice
with any bus or indeed any other large vehicle.

It is more dangerous to do this on a bendy than a minibus, but
one should not do it on any kind of bus unless there is a marked
cycle lane there in which to perform the manoeuvre. Even if there
is, overtaking such a vehicle on the left that is indicating to turn
left is blind stupidity, but again alarmingly common.

It's more often the other way round (other than in almost
stationary traffic when in effect cycles are moving ion a virtual
lane). Buses cut in on cyclists. Some cycle lanes actively
encourage it by stopping at bus stops.

Of course cycle lanes stop at bus stops! Are you suggesting that
they should continue through bus stops so that passengers alighting
from the bus step into the path of a cyclist?

Indeed, but I don't expect buses to cut in front of cycles as the enter
the bus stops, rather than let them go ahead instead (as most bus drivers
do, to be fair).

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Jun 9, 12:37 pm, "Jack Taylor" wrote:
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
We have had claims from cyclists that they have been terrified to find
themselves crowded against safety barriers by bendy buses making left
turns.

I have to say, as a cyclist, that in such situations the actions of the
cyclist are often contributory.

If the bendy bus is stationary in the lane, waiting to turn left, and the
cyclist rides up the inside of the line of traffic (i.e. overtaking on the
inside) and positions themself between the bus and the barrier, then they
are asking for trouble. They should be stopping behind the last stationary
vehicle in the traffic queue.

Similarly, if the cyclist is the first to arrive at the line, waiting to
turn left, and they sit in the gutter, adjacent to the barrier, then they
are not protecting themselves from other vehicles. In such situations, I
always position myself in the centre of the left-turn lane, to ensure that
no vehicle can pull up and sit to my right - they have to stop behind me and
wait for me to clear the corner before proceeding.

As a cyclist you have to foresee these situations and act accordingly.



Bendy buses are a silly idea for a city like London. Everyone knows
it and, in real life, pedestrians and cyclists and possibly others are
suffering.

Instead of dreaming up ways of avoiding these newly-introduced
hazards, why not just see sense and get rid of the bluddy things?

They are constantly parking across junctions and crossings. If their
drivers followed the highway code (which of course they don't) they
would only ever start moving through a junction or crossing if there
was a full bendy bus length of space available beyond. A regular bus
or three cars might have been able to move on, but a bendy bus
shouldn't.

So the choice is to park across junctions and pedestrian crossings,
causing a hazard, or to sit there until there is enough space beyond,
causing congestion.

They are causing problems. We all know it. Let's get rid of them.
They can be sold of for use as airport transit or for cities where
there are nothing but wide boulevards.

On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 20:17 +0100 (BST), (Colin
Rosenstiel) wrote:

It's more often the other way round (other than in almost stationary
traffic when in effect cycles are moving ion a virtual lane). Buses cut
in on cyclists. Some cycle lanes actively encourage it by stopping at bus
stops.

This is true, and it's happened to me a few times. In the
Netherlands, however, bus drivers seem quite happy to pull in behind
the cyclist without being intimidating if it is not safe to overtake
in the space available before the stop.

It's another world, sadly.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 20:45:36 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

Of course cycle lanes stop at bus stops! Are you suggesting that they
should continue through bus stops so that passengers alighting from the
bus step into the path of a cyclist?

In the Netherlands they normally run outside the bus stop, so the bus
crosses from the general traffic lane through the cycle lane into a
deeper bus stop. This requires more road space to implement, however,
and such space isn't really available in London.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 15:27:41 -0700, MIG
wrote:

Bendy buses are a silly idea for a city like London. Everyone knows
it and, in real life, pedestrians and cyclists and possibly others are
suffering.

Bendy buses - and in some cases 16m rigid buses with steering rear
axles - are not a problem in many European cities. The problem is in
those driving them, but equally in those road users around them not
taking their length into account.

They are a sensible solution for high-loading, short-distance feeder
routes like the Red Arrows and the Oxford Street heavily-loaded
services.

They are constantly parking across junctions and crossings. If their
drivers followed the highway code (which of course they don't) they
would only ever start moving through a junction or crossing if there
was a full bendy bus length of space available beyond. A regular bus
or three cars might have been able to move on, but a bendy bus
shouldn't.

Correct. So, clearly, more driver training (or, if appropriate,
enforcement) is required, as are certain minor modifications to the
road infrastructure to allow them to operate safely.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

MIG wrote:

If their
drivers followed the highway code (which of course they don't) they
would only ever start moving through a junction or crossing if there
was a full bendy bus length of space available beyond. A regular bus
or three cars might have been able to move on, but a bendy bus
shouldn't.


The problem there is that if there are two lanes, as soon as there is a
car-length space on the opposite side of the junction, the car stopped
alongside the bus will cut diagonally across the box junction into the
space, and this will happen repeatedly, so a space big enough for a bus will
never appear. This isn't necessarily maliciousness on the car driver's part,
since overtaking stationary buses is such a normal instinctive part of
driving.

The solution is to make it illegal to change lane in a box junction. But box
junction observance is generally abysmal anyway, buses being the worst
offenders but not the only ones.

In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote:

On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 20:45:36 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

Of course cycle lanes stop at bus stops! Are you suggesting that
they should continue through bus stops so that passengers
alighting from the bus step into the path of a cyclist?

In the Netherlands they normally run outside the bus stop, so the
bus crosses from the general traffic lane through the cycle lane into a
deeper bus stop. This requires more road space to implement,
however, and such space isn't really available in London.

But where there is space that is sometimes done in the UK.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote:

On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 20:17 +0100 (BST), (Colin
Rosenstiel) wrote:

It's more often the other way round (other than in almost
stationary traffic when in effect cycles are moving ion a virtual
lane). Buses cut in on cyclists. Some cycle lanes actively encourage
it by stopping at bus stops.

This is true, and it's happened to me a few times. In the
Netherlands, however, bus drivers seem quite happy to pull in behind
the cyclist without being intimidating if it is not safe to overtake
in the space available before the stop.

It's another world, sadly.

It's not unknown here but considerate bus drivers are not universal.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 02:48 +0100 (BST), (Colin
Rosenstiel) wrote:

This is from a London Assembly Liberal Democrats' press release. It
accords with my own experiences:


(Snipped)

The OP quoted a statement by a politician that lacked any context,
explanation or qualification.

It claims that injuries to cyclists (and pedestrians) are higher on
bendibus routes, and suggested that we infer that the higher rates are
caused by the bendibuses. It does not, however, say that buses were
actually involved in these accidents. Without this and other
information it is meaningless.

Bendibuses are used on the busiest roads. You would expect those roads
to higher accident rates. To suggest that the buses are the cause,
however, requires a littles more work.

For example, have the rates of other vehicular traffic been taken into
account? Have similarly busy roads that lack bendibuses been studied?

Pace, Colin. I know from your postings on this and other NGs that you
are not one to jump to rash conclusions. But the statement is hardly
rigorous. I really can't tell if there's anything to this, or not. But
you do have some anecdotal experience, which I lack.

Have you anything which could be considered statistical or scientific?