Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

thirdcrank
Posts: 36764
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by thirdcrank »

Then there is the red cycle light. What does this mean if the general light is showing green at the time?
If I've read the TSRGD correctly, the only authorised uses of a red cycle light - as in a red light with a cycle-shaped aspect - are

Diagrams 30002.2 and 3000.2A 'Traffic light signals for the control of vehicular traffic consisting solely of pedal cycles (Alternative types)'

Diagrams 4003.7 and 4003.7 A 'Nearside light signals and instructions for pedestrians and cyclists at a Toucan crossing'

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/201 ... le/14/made

If I've got that right, there should be no cycle red lights on general carriageways. Which assumes highwaymen get it right as well.
Jdsk
Posts: 24478
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by Jdsk »

PT1029 wrote: 13 Apr 2021, 7:59pmWe have some in Oxford.
The 1st went in at the High St/Longwall St junction. Often in term time 10 or more bikes in the ASL, and often still sorting (not finished) themselves back ino single file when the road narrows (central traffic island - EDIT no island, but waiting oncoming right turn traffic has the same effect) and cars trying to overtake (and buses need to encroach the cycle lane). When installed, cycles had a 10 sec head start, which enabled every one to get back into single file by the time the motors caught up. A post Covid tweek was to increase the head start to 15secs.
I've been cycling that junction (and the Plain!) for 50y. But haven't been there since Christmas. The extra time for the people on bikes to sort themselves out sounds smart.

I tend to put in a bit more effort than usual until I'm clear of the Porter's Lodge.

Jonathan
prestavalve
Posts: 126
Joined: 24 Dec 2020, 8:03pm

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by prestavalve »

mjr wrote: 1. We are not "co-equal road users". We have a right to ride on roads, but motorists are only there by licence. Generally, the only things with more rights to the road than cyclists are walkers and wild animals. The roads should be reshaped to benefit walking and cycling.
Quite, the roads belong to us as the Caledonian mountainside does to the noble stag.
mjr wrote: 2. That's trivial to write but much more difficult to do. And writing nonsense like someone else above that claiming taking the lane doesn't require confidence or speed won't change the mind of anyone who has ever tried it.
The best solution remains a world in which cyclists take the lane, I fail to understand why anyone should apologise for believing that. If you want to accept a world in which that is not possible for any but the most elite middle aged athlete, then crack on.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20297
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by mjr »

prestavalve wrote: 14 Apr 2021, 5:01pm
mjr wrote: 2. That's trivial to write but much more difficult to do. And writing nonsense like someone else above that claiming taking the lane doesn't require confidence or speed won't change the mind of anyone who has ever tried it.
The best solution remains a world in which cyclists take the lane, I fail to understand why anyone should apologise for believing that. If you want to accept a world in which that is not possible for any but the most elite middle aged athlete, then crack on.
Now I am confused. I am in favour of these early start lights that encourage and support cyclists moving themselves in front and spreading out. I thought you were arguing against them and in favour of the status quo, where in practice only your "most elite middle aged athletes" can take the lane?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
prestavalve
Posts: 126
Joined: 24 Dec 2020, 8:03pm

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by prestavalve »

mjr wrote: Now I am confused. I am in favour of these early start lights that encourage and support cyclists moving themselves in front and spreading out. I thought you were arguing against them and in favour of the status quo, where in practice only your "most elite middle aged athletes" can take the lane?
I believe in a wonderful future in which even grannies on Pashleys will be hairless and clad in the smoothest lycra.

Not really, but I do think that the more "special arrangements" that are made for cyclists, the more "special" they become. We are slowly campaigning ourselves off the road and onto the cycle path, and I don't like it.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20297
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by mjr »

prestavalve wrote: 14 Apr 2021, 5:33pm Not really, but I do think that the more "special arrangements" that are made for cyclists, the more "special" they become. We are slowly campaigning ourselves off the road and onto the cycle path, and I don't like it.
More realistically, in this instance, we're campaigning ourselves to not only overtake the queue of stopped motorists in their inappropriately-oversized-for-cities wagons but to be able to get through the junction before they start their deadly waltzes.

There have always been different rules for motoring and cycling and that should be used to benefit cycling.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Bmblbzzz
Posts: 6249
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by Bmblbzzz »

Pete Owens wrote: 14 Apr 2021, 3:55pm
Bmblbzzz wrote: 14 Apr 2021, 10:26am Yep, it seems to be 4s from cycle green to car green, only about 3s from cycle green to car red+amber.
Which isn't long enough for a right turning cyclist to clear the junction before oncoming traffic is given a green. (and the red+amber should show for 2 seconds)
As a general principle, I agree. In relation to these particular lights at the Triangle in Bristol, there is no right turn (nor left turn).
On the other side they've got a completely separate set of mini lights so cyclists get their own red+amber as well as their own green.
And this starts to get worrying because cycle traffic lights are being used in different ways with different meanings even at the same junction.

If you approach a normal set of traffic lights with red/amber/green and maybe green L/R arrows you know what each of those signals means.
If you see a green cycle light you dont know whether that means a dedicated stage with conflicting traffic held at red long enough for you to clear the junction or just a little bit of a head start. That is a significant difference if you are turning right.

Then there is the red cycle light. What does this mean if the general light is showing green at the time?
I don't know if these are being used in different ways in other places, but again in relation to this particular site, the lights with the green cycle symbol are at a pedestrian crossing. The lights where there are conflicting vehicle movements don't have this (I think: I'll hopefully remember to check this out tomorrow) though arguably an early green for the cycle lane could be given without conflict. There is no specific red cycle light, the mini lamps at eye level turn red with the main lights.
mattheus
Posts: 5030
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by mattheus »

prestavalve wrote: 14 Apr 2021, 5:01pm
The best solution remains a world in which cyclists take the lane, I fail to understand why anyone should apologise for believing that.
The best solution is quite clearly one where all road users are diligent and competent. I suggest you try to understand that this will not happen.

Then maybe slowly work upto a little pragmatism in your life ...
atlas_shrugged
Posts: 534
Joined: 8 Nov 2016, 7:50pm

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by atlas_shrugged »

We have had a load of these cycle prioritised traffic lights in Cranebridge. They are quite good and I would probably give them 5/10.

What I like is that they give a wobbly and non-confident cyclist time to get going and escape from aggressive and dangerous motorists from behind or wanting to left hook from behind or right-hook from in front. I do not know the difference these junctions make to cyclist safety but I would guess they are a bit safer. The other thing I like is that because the cycles have escaped this is better for the motorist as they worry less about hitting a cyclist.

BUT I ask the question why can't cyclists and pedestrians have *complete* safety? For this to happen there needs to be complete segregation especially at junctions. Cranebridge has just wacked in a box tunnel under Newmarket Road as part of the Chisholm trail. This was quite an expensive operation and has taken time to build. The magnificent Dutch can wack a box tunnel underpass under an 8-lane motorway in 24 hours by contrast. But even if looking at this from a bean counting point of view and say £2M for the underpass how does this compare with the cost of a human life? A human life is already costed by our government at over £1M. So if the underpass saves even 1 life then this starts to be worth doing. What is the value of a world reknown expert in Botany for example - these lives are priceless.

My other reason for prioritising vulnerable road users is that this radically increases their average speed and makes their mode of transport competitive with motor vehicles. In Cranebridge a car journey of 4 miles can now often take 2 hours. In Oxford a 1 mile car trip down the Botley Road can take 1 hour. These are measured speeds by me. Equally a cyclist or a pedestrian who knows their normal speed will be horrified at how slow their journey is in inner cities or even between cities. The culprit is the continuous stop-start that they have to make at junctions. It is here that the danger lies. So why not totally remove the danger and reduce the journey time by half? That way the most dangerous thing the 5-year old cyclist will crash into might be a daffodil!
prestavalve
Posts: 126
Joined: 24 Dec 2020, 8:03pm

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by prestavalve »

mattheus wrote: The best solution is quite clearly one where all road users are diligent and competent. I suggest you try to understand that this will not happen.
I do understand this. In fact, I would suggest that ever assuming, even in a perfect world, that another road user is competent would be a short cut to A&E. I don't expect any environment to be free of risk. My argument here is that I don't believe that non-cyclists', or inexperienced cyclists', perception of risk should be used as the foundation for "how we cycle". It is their opinion, and they are entitled to it, but they are wrong: roads are not a prohibitively dangerous place to cycle.

What's more, if you construct cycle paths for cyclists to use (or have special lights and allowances), then you can't blame motorists for making the logical assumption that cyclists belong on cycle paths or aren't "traffic" in the same way as other road users: wrong though it may be, it is perfectly reasonable for them to think those things. What's more, if the received wisdom is that cycling on the roads is dangerous (which is why we built those cycle paths in the first place 'innit) then I am sure the person who rides on the road is, by natural extension a "reckless idiot" in the eyes of the driver.

Out of interest, has anyone ever shouted "you belong on the cycle path" at you? Has anyone not had this happen at one time or another?

Ever heard anyone down the pub arguing that they, in fact, love cycle paths because it keeps cyclists off the road?
mattheus
Posts: 5030
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by mattheus »

prestavalve wrote: 15 Apr 2021, 12:06pm
mattheus wrote: The best solution is quite clearly one where all road users are diligent and competent. I suggest you try to understand that this will not happen.
I do understand this. In fact, I would suggest that ever assuming, even in a perfect world, that another road user is competent would be a short cut to A&E. I don't expect any environment to be free of risk. My argument here is that I don't believe that non-cyclists', or inexperienced cyclists', perception of risk should be used as the foundation for "how we cycle".
And yet you are arguing with an experienced cyclist who thinks his local facility is a good design. A cyclist with experience of riders at different ability levels and a range of confidence. A realistic representative sample, if you will.

(Maybe people like him designed the changes? I would wager that you don't know.)
prestavalve
Posts: 126
Joined: 24 Dec 2020, 8:03pm

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by prestavalve »

mattheus wrote: And yet you are arguing with an experienced cyclist who thinks his local facility is a good design. A cyclist with experience of riders at different ability levels and a range of confidence. A realistic representative sample, if you will.
I think that any discussion taking place on a Cycling UK message board would probably skew towards the clipless-sandals end of the sample range.

Do you really see no mileage in my concerns?
mattheus
Posts: 5030
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by mattheus »

prestavalve wrote: 15 Apr 2021, 12:52pm
I think that any discussion taking place on a Cycling UK message board would probably skew towards the clipless-sandals end of the sample range.
??

I think you need to stop digressing into your vast range of pet bugbears; this might allow any sense in your posts to shine through.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36764
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by thirdcrank »

I see a difference between farcilities getting cyclists "out of the road" and modifying traffic lights to give cyclists visible priority. I'd equate it more with traffic schemes which exempt cyclists from bans / restrictions on motor traffic. It's a way of saying that cyclists are not part of the problem which the ban is intended to cure.

On the subject of this type of traffic light, I'm a "don't know" through lack of experience or a detailed rationale. My instinct is that it might be one of those things that initially seems like a good idea but isn't.
Stevek76
Posts: 2084
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by Stevek76 »

prestavalve wrote: 15 Apr 2021, 12:06pm It is their opinion, and they are entitled to it, but they are wrong: roads are not a prohibitively dangerous place to cycle.
So how are you going to get them out of their cars and onto cycles then? Perception, not reality, is the defining factor that influences peoples' travel choices and therefore it is the perception that we need to address. Vehicular cycling is not a solution to that problem, cars naturally dominate from being an order of magnitude heavier and 2 or more orders more powerful, sure, some of us are happy enough to take the lane, most are not, telling them they're irrational is not going to change that.

And even for those of us that are, if I'm cycling as a form of transport (i.e. in clothes for my destination, not for the ride) dealing with the abject idiocy of people in cars is still something I'd prefer not to deal with. If I could have relaxing, direct and convenient cycle, per the netherlands, vs a not relaxing, shouting at idiots and inevitably submitting footage to A&S to get a few of them fined cycle I'd very much prefer the former.

Of course, ASLs & early greens do very little for the not already cycling, they are measures that somewhat help out the already cycling, or in many cases, simply formally legalise what many were already doing.

As for that paint in oxford, that's just pathetic. It's a very good thing that LTN1/20 makes it quite clear that such things are not inclusive, narrow streets is just an excuse, a network level exercise to remove at least one lane of motor traffic is the answer there - the existence of central reservations and right turn bays is a fairly good indication of spare space as well.

It is clear from existing examples what gets people cycling and that's what the dutch have been doing. And if you want to go cycling in with cars in tight lycra, helmets and 3 bolt clipless shoes you can absolutely still do that. Using your words, you're entitled to the opinion that proper cycling infrastructure is just to get cycles out of the of way of cars, but you're wrong. :wink:
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
Post Reply