Intersection Road Rules

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Intersection Road Rules

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

17934 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2062822 26-Jul-2018 10:32

It's an odd design. European cycle designs usually have a cycles only box in front of all the cars. This would make the cycles clearly visible to the cars as well as ensuring they get away ahead of the cars when the lights change.

Backblaze

Backblaze Unlimited Backup. World’s easiest cloud backup. Get peace of mind knowing your files are backed up securely in the cloud (affiliate link).

MikeAqua

7769 posts

Uber Geek

#2062829 26-Jul-2018 10:43

scuwp:

No such thing as blind spots...only drivers who don't look properly.

On my hatchback there is no-way to see into the passenger side blind spot from the drivers seat. Drivers side I can see some of the blind spot via the drivers door window.

I can keep an eye out for things entering my blind spots, but that is inference not 'looking'.

Mike

MikeAqua

7769 posts

Uber Geek

#2062831 26-Jul-2018 10:45

Coil:

scuwp:

No such thing as blind spots...only drivers who don't look properly.

How sure are you of that statement? The vehicle below would take a super human with xray vision to stand to your statement.

If he really thinks blind spots don't exist at all then he is quite a danger on the road.

Mike

Geektastic

17934 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2062877 26-Jul-2018 11:05

MikeAqua:

Coil:

scuwp:

No such thing as blind spots...only drivers who don't look properly.

How sure are you of that statement? The vehicle below would take a super human with xray vision to stand to your statement.

If he really thinks blind spots don't exist at all then he is quite a danger on the road.

They exist. Hence the reason many modern cars have systems to warn you of things in them - such as Volvo's BLIS.

cruxis

476 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2062913 26-Jul-2018 11:36

Blind spots do exist but that SMIDSY defense will not work in the courts. These accidents occur enough times in CHCH that the drivers are almost always at fault.

The judge said the 51-year-old was a professional and experienced driver, who was aware of the vehicle's blind spots.

He found although Connell didn't know whether a cyclist was in the cycling lane, he took no precaution at all against that risk and should have known he had the option to wait a few seconds.

"He ought to have know that this option was available to him," Judge MacAskill said.

"The fact that he thought he was driving carefully is not the point. A reasonable careful driver would have responded to the risk by waiting a few seconds, to be sure that there was no unseen cyclist in the cycle lane and that they way was clear for him to turn left."

source:

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11679536

alasta

6685 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#2062925 26-Jul-2018 12:07

Geektastic: It's an odd design. European cycle designs usually have a cycles only box in front of all the cars. This would make the cycles clearly visible to the cars as well as ensuring they get away ahead of the cars when the lights change.

These exist in central Wellington but they don't seem to work very well because drivers go past their threshold and sit in the cycle priority space while waiting for the lights to change.

MikeAqua

7769 posts

Uber Geek

#2062936 26-Jul-2018 12:34

alasta:

These exist in central Wellington but they don't seem to work very well because drivers go past their threshold and sit in the cycle priority space while waiting for the lights to change.

True. I did this until I understood the purpose of the green boxes. I don't use them as a cyclist (in Nelson). I let the cars go first. Safer for me that way.

Mike

Geektastic

17934 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2062962 26-Jul-2018 13:46

alasta:

Geektastic: It's an odd design. European cycle designs usually have a cycles only box in front of all the cars. This would make the cycles clearly visible to the cars as well as ensuring they get away ahead of the cars when the lights change.

These exist in central Wellington but they don't seem to work very well because drivers go past their threshold and sit in the cycle priority space while waiting for the lights to change.

Ah; well, I am sure we have rehashed just how poor driver training and education standards are already, a fair few times. Unfortunately, it appears that the government is not reading...!

scuwp

3879 posts

Uber Geek

#2063023 26-Jul-2018 15:35

MikeAqua:

Coil:

scuwp:

No such thing as blind spots...only drivers who don't look properly.

How sure are you of that statement? The vehicle below would take a super human with xray vision to stand to your statement.

If he really thinks blind spots don't exist at all then he is quite a danger on the road.

I obviously disagree. Yes there are obstructions to visibility, but that is not an excuse to claim a 'blind spot' caused a crash. An observant driver using proper techniques (taught at any basic defensive driving course) will effectively scan and observe other vehicles/cyclists etc and will be aware of their environment at all times. Good drivers recognise the limitations/risks of their situation and take proper steps to mitigate or eliminate the issue (e.g. proper scanning will identify a vehicle moving into your blind spot, or make you take extra care and perhaps another few seconds to be sure). A blind spot is (in most cases) a lazy drivers excuse. Yes technology advancements are great, but just perpetuate lazy driving techniques.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

SpartanVXL

1266 posts

Uber Geek

#2063055 26-Jul-2018 16:45

scuwp:

I obviously disagree. Yes there are obstructions to visibility, but that is not an excuse to claim a 'blind spot' caused a crash. An observant driver using proper techniques (taught at any basic defensive driving course) will effectively scan and observe other vehicles/cyclists etc and will be aware of their environment at all times. Good drivers recognise the limitations/risks of their situation and take proper steps to mitigate or eliminate the issue (e.g. proper scanning will identify a vehicle moving into your blind spot, or make you take extra care and perhaps another few seconds to be sure). A blind spot is (in most cases) a lazy drivers excuse. Yes technology advancements are great, but just perpetuate lazy driving techniques.

A few seconds can be vastly different depending on situations. Humans don't have 360 degrees field of view. I've had multiple occasions where in the short second I've taken to scan, somebody be it a car, bike or cycle has accelerated into the 'blind spot' where my direct vision or perpherials+mirrors don't see them. They don't care that they blocked my move, even with proper indication. They also conveniently forget the road rules about not driving where people can't see you.

Traffic just makes this worse. People want to get places, and the rules get bent to accommodate. I've seen uber eats scooters boost over pedestrian pathways to skip intersections.

I'd like automated cars + intersections please. No relying on people, if you want things to run by the rules program it.

mclean

581 posts

Ultimate Geek

Subscriber

#2063066 26-Jul-2018 16:51

scuwp: I obviously disagree. Yes there are obstructions to visibility, but that is not an excuse to claim a 'blind spot' caused a crash. An observant driver using proper techniques (taught at any basic defensive driving course) will effectively scan and observe other vehicles/cyclists etc and will be aware of their environment at all times. Good drivers recognise the limitations/risks of their situation and take proper steps to mitigate or eliminate the issue (e.g. proper scanning will identify a vehicle moving into your blind spot, or make you take extra care and perhaps another few seconds to be sure). A blind spot is (in most cases) a lazy drivers excuse. Yes technology advancements are great, but just perpetuate lazy driving techniques.

OK. I take the turn in the picture regularly and here's a not untypical situation: It's night time and raining. There's a heavy truck close behind me with it's headlights shining straight into my wet door mirrors. I'm obliged to make sure no-one approaching in the cycle lane before I turn, but from inside the car I can't see. I can either stop and wait (for what I don't know); get out of the car and go and have a look down the cycle lane (this is a very busy road junction); or forget the turn and go home.

The point I'm trying to make is that this is inherently bad design which causes accidents. The idea that cyclists and cars can share roads is great, but adding a straight-through cycle lane to the left side of a left-turn lane is a share-the-road compromise that has gone too far. In the short term it's dangerous; in the long term there has to be a better way than sharing.

Lastman

306 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2063078 26-Jul-2018 17:45

cruxis:
Blind spots do exist but that SMIDSY defense will not work in the courts. These accidents occur enough times in CHCH that the drivers are almost always at fault.

The judge said the 51-year-old was a professional and experienced driver, who was aware of the vehicle's blind spots.

He found although Connell didn't know whether a cyclist was in the cycling lane, he took no precaution at all against that risk and should have known he had the option to wait a few seconds.

"He ought to have know that this option was available to him," Judge MacAskill said.

"The fact that he thought he was driving carefully is not the point. A reasonable careful driver would have responded to the risk by waiting a few seconds, to be sure that there was no unseen cyclist in the cycle lane and that they way was clear for him to turn left."

source:

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11679536

Cyclist killed in Napier a few years ago in same manner and truck driver convicted recently. Cyclist went under truck that turned left. Driver didn’t even realize he had done it.

Not sure if it was a cycle lane but cyclists will use the inside path anyway.

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1420 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2063080 26-Jul-2018 17:47

I absolutely hate this stupid road design. Having a straight through lane on the left of a left turn lane is so dumb the designer should be reported to Worksafe for endangering the public. I would even suggest that the road marking company should refuse to mark up such a design. Only a complete moron could fail to see the possibility of a fatal accident here.

having said that....the cycle lane does not extend through the intersection. It stops and then restarts on the other side. In this case if the cyclist is going faster than the car (passing on the left) then they are at fault. They can only do that in a marked lane.

The problem is, if traffic is heavy and there are pedestrians present etc etc the driver will have a very high workload. Any cyclist that shoots up the inside of a left-indicating car (even in marked lane) in that circumstance is a numpty.

Matthew

jurgensp99

67 posts

Master Geek

#2063769 27-Jul-2018 17:12

You mean you want something like this?

Strange how we can't have uniform road marking rules across a city/country.

mattwnz

20096 posts

Uber Geek

#2063795 27-Jul-2018 18:42

I would feel nervous riding a cycle down that green strip in between two main lanes of traffic. It is putting a lot of faith in other drivers for safety, and I can see cars and trucks cutting across it. I think if they are doing cycle lanes, they need to be separated fromt eh road. In my town they removed the cycle lanes, and made cycle tracks, which were well away from the main busy roads.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5